Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's your threshold then a true anything has never been tried.
Are you saying the US political system is the gold standard / state of the art democracy model?
No, I'm just saying it is a democracy
The Language of Democracy
31–40 of 53 posts
Re: The Language of Democracy
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Democracy is a system of government, not an economic model. You could easily argue, simultaneously: 1. Capitalism has failed in those countries, even if in different times and places one could say capitalism has succeeded 2. India and Mexico have major issues with their democracies—if a democracy is a system of government in which the citizens of a state hold collective power over their government, then there are man…
> Democracy is a system of government, not an economic model. For the longest time, "Democracy" the political system was bandied about to be the primary precondition for economic progress. The thinking was, that when people (countries) have democracy this somehow "empowers" them to become economically successful. This reasoning was fairly prevalent, after all, the U.S., the showcase of democracy, was such an economic…
> For the longest time, "Democracy" the political system was bandied about to be the primary precondition for economic progress.
I agree with you. I think that mindset has a fundamental misunderstanding of the root cause of economic prosperity.
Economic prosperity comes from liberty. Democracy and liberty are two very different things. For a long time, they were treated as roughly equivalent.
China figured out that economic liberty, coupled with state sponsored abusive labor conditions and few ecological restrictions, can effectively compete with "democracy" where people are able to vote to regulate labor markets.
In the face of this, Democracy is a weakness. After all, how can a Western economy that's voting itself (for example) four day work weeks and great work/life balance benefits compete with forced labor in the short term?
I think it competes well in the medium to long term, as economic systems that maximize liberty seem to mostly win.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#33From wikipedia's Christopher Lasch entry, here is a quote from his: ``` A feminist movement that respected the achievements of women in the past would not disparage housework, motherhood or unpaid civic and neighborly services. It would not make a paycheck the only symbol of accomplishment. ... It would insist that people need self-respecting honorable callings, not glamorous careers that carry high salaries but take…
I will support feminism when feminists protest against male only military conscription in Ukraine. Until then it's just one of "we only care about our own kind of people" movement like white supremacy or black lives matter. If you believe in sending men literally to their death while staying safe yourself, you should be at least willing to do some house work in return. Personally I think nobody should be forced to fight a war and everyone should be able to volunteer, and countries that can't find enough volunteers do not deserve to exist. Pretty sure there will be more men fighting in practice, but if that's by choice, it's not an injustice.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#34> Everyday political talk rejects the language of universality in favor of the idioms of affinity. To call a candidate or policy based or cringe, pilled or normie—terms without a fixed meaning even for those who invoke them—is to situate oneself in a particular group against an ill-defined mainstream.
so too does this apply to “elite”, but the essay uses it liberally and a fun exercise is to try and replace each occurrence with its “plain” equivalent.
> Obscurity impedes solidarity.
don’t reveal your answer to the above exercise. if we do, we’ll discover that we’re all reading slightly different details into the text, and that may put us in conflict. you and i can be in solidarity against the “elites” only because of our differences which this term serves to obscure.
> To write plainly (and read texts with the expectation of plainness) was to make information meaningful and persuasion possible.
persuasion is about selling an image. information serves only to constrain the image. rarely do they work hand-in-hand.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#35Is democracy a good idea? Is it working out for India and Mexico and the rest of the middle-income countries? We're all supposed to love Democracy by default but ... I don't know anymore.
Yes democracy is a good idea. The idea that the people govern themselves.
Now we can discuss how well the so called democracies of our time implement the idea. For example, the pavlovian association of election = democracies has always left me perplexed.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#36Also recommended: "The Language of the Third Reich" - the language of authoritarian fascism. It's scary to see aspects of it being used all around the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTI_%E2%80%93_Lingua_Tertii_Im... This is taught in German schools, but should be taught everywhere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTI_%E2%80%93_Lingua_Tertii_Im...
One of the examples here strikes a parallel with the US government's "Enhanced Interrogation" used as a euphemism for torture starting during the bush years. Straight from the Nazi playbook: "Verschärfte Vernehmung ("intensified interrogation"): torture"
We also use the phrase “concentration camp” (Konzentrationslager) to refer to death camps.
Which is really weird as it’s not a common English phase, and seems to be a straight copy of Nazi propaganda.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
You want a monarchy?
Personally, I've always believed the best form of government is an absolute monarchy headed by a benevolent monarch. The problem with that, of course, is benevolent monarchs are few and far between.
You may be surprised your role in an absolute monarchy would be a horse manure cleaner, not a noble landlord you are imagining it in your head. Same would go for your children - with no possibility to change it. Have fun!
Re: The Language of Democracy
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people say that. Revealed preference raises its head when it comes to the real world, and it turns out American interest is a better predictor.
Americans, despite their bellyaching, live in a democractic republic and can afford to indulge in romantic fantasies about benevolent dictatorships (as they often do about civil war and revolution,) while remaining safe from (edit:likely) ever having suffer their consequences. People who have actually lived under dictatorships, meanwhile, very rarely seem to recommend it over democracy.
It's a good system for us but it's not like we ask the world for a vote before doing things that affect others.
Re: The Language of Democracy
#39From wikipedia's Christopher Lasch entry, here is a quote from his: ``` A feminist movement that respected the achievements of women in the past would not disparage housework, motherhood or unpaid civic and neighborly services. It would not make a paycheck the only symbol of accomplishment. ... It would insist that people need self-respecting honorable callings, not glamorous careers that carry high salaries but take…
I will support feminism when feminists protest against male only military conscription in Ukraine. Until then it's just one of "we only care about our own kind of people" movement like white supremacy or black lives matter. If you believe in sending men literally to their death while staying safe yourself, you should be at least willing to do some house work in return. Personally I think nobody should be forced to fi…
Yes the real injustice is that women don't want to participate in the violence that has been perpetrated almost entirely by men since the dawn of time
Re: The Language of Democracy
#40What democracy? Please show me a true democracy The US is not it
Do you not consider the Swiss Confederation to be a democracy? If so, why not?