Good.
GrafZahl
joined 5 years ago
Very very frightening
Helldiver? Oh yea, he will!
Aww man i didnt get Tickets this year
Better definition for socialism than any social democrat would give tbh.
Love that for my landlord. At least I have another 5 years before hes allowed to come and insult me to my face again.
Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we owned a lot of libs.
When I had parts in an orchestra, there were parts where i was supposed to just be quiet for a hundred bars or whatever. Far too long to count, and when youre sitting in your section you only hear the people next to you so i never knew what part of the song we were in. The conductor usually gives a signal when its time to start playing again, even If its just a nod or a look.
Do you mean autocratic?
Yes thank you.
I cannot speak on the American system specifically. I think i disagree that the government tries to counter democracy. If that was the case, there would simply not be elections. The system as it exists in most countries is democracy as intended. As i said, Im making a conscious decision to not define democracy as something that does not currently exist in reality, and im naturally primarily looking at the state that i happen to live under, which is commonly described as democratic.
The average social democrat would agree If we said, the rich are working against democracy. If we just prevented bribes, biased media etc. we could vote for a party that will use the power of the state for the good of the people. I believe that to be impossible. A party either serves the national interest of performing well in international competition, or it has no chance at succeeding in democracy. Im afraid i cannot expand on this, as I do not feel ready to make a complete and coherent argument yet.
I think democracy and its institutions are the means to align the interests of voters with the national interests of the state, which itself are tied to the interests of domestic capital through taxation. But im not sure and i'll have to read more.
Ive been questioning my idealistic view of democracy. It is the prefered form of government by the bourgeois class, and is no less authocratic than other forms of government. Democracy is not the opposite of authocratic rule. The bourgeois state does not mind which mechanism has been used to justify its existence. The state claims authority and wields it. Should we really say that elections, parliament, equality and freedom etc. are undemocratic? Democrats the world over would disagree.
Regular History