648
What would you do?
(reddthat.com)
Its rhetorical. You take him to the beach!
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
648 points (98.9% liked)
> Greentext
7547 readers
142 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Blah blah blah blah, okay i get it, you're so biased against the left that you in your flawed logic think that every single one of us lefties is incapable of comprehending context and nuance, a complaint I commonly make about my conservative father, and which you seem to suffer from as well. Additionally you're basically just bitching, at length, about the ever present vocal minority, the Righties have them too, except that they seem to be in control of the GOP now, meanwhile the Dems are lead by centrists, go figure.
Case in point:
This is where you're missing nuance and context yourself, you don't realize that our democracy isn't designed for "more parties", and I put that in quotes because there are already more parties available, but we exist and participate in an adversarial democracy, where it's two parties fighting an ever drifting balance, this was how our founding fathers designed our democracy to work. The nuance in this is also that, for a new party to replace one of the existing primary parties they would have to both achieve a level of popularity and funding.
Now with that said I think we're very close to that happening with the GOP/MAGA Party, if Trump loses they will face a strong possibility of collapse, and if this happens without a civil war I picture a further left party rising and the Democrats shifting back to being the conservative party, like they were prior to the civil rights era and the Southern Strategy.
Haha I was right! You're missing pretty much all of what I'm saying.
This quote is great because I was just complaining about how people use this as an argument. Which I think is worthless. I think something like STV is a much better system than what the founding fathers came up with. Just because the founding fathers said something doesn't mean it is the best way. If fact saying because the founding fathers did anything in itself is meaningless and not an argument for what should be done.
Yet mechanisms, beauracrasies, and laws based on those concepts exist and govern our lives, so are you naive, or just out of touch with reality?
I'm all for things changing for things changing for the better, I agree with you about why base things on what people from an archaic era have to say about how to deal with modern life, but let's not fool ourselves, we can't just make these changes overnight, especially not without violence, or the threat of violence, there have to he gradual and systemic changes made, risks to be considered, and plans to be made and implemented, which all takes time, and that's generally how things are already going, and have been since women's sufferage began here.
A lot of the current problem also stems from things from the Confederate era, where we let the wound of the first civil war fester and flourish, entities like the John Birch Society, Daughters of the Confederacy, and other Confederate based political groups continue to pull at that divide, and yearn for "the good old days" aka slavery and gays being shoved back into the closet, snd these folks seem to have massive influence over right wing politics. Pair that with the systemic issues black folks face, makes for quite the powder keg.
I completely agree with you on STV, that or Ranked Choice voting should be the way forward, that would raise the quality of candidates.