• gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the American electorate was slightly less stupid, I’d be ecstatic, because he made himself effectively kryptonite to reasonable, intelligent people with that statement.

    Unfortunately, the American electorate is, on average, that stupid.

    • ALQ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s worse is that the average is weighted further toward stupid by gerrymandering. They’re right that the game is rigged, it’s just not rigged against them.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    1 year ago

    This “not a democracy, a republic” crap is becoming more and more popular on the right. They’re not even trying to hide the authoritarianism and fascism any more. They’re now openly saying they don’t support democracy.

    • GreenMario@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s literally “democracy = Democrats” and “a republic = republican” to them, simple as.

      The Democrats should rename themselves the “Freedom Liberty” party just to fuck with em. Take back some of their words.

      • norbert@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is great, call it the Patriot Party or something and talk about how government waste has turned “Citizens On Patrol” into a bunch of lazy, freedom-suppressing, union members.

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      A republic is a type of democracy. This guy is an idiot. 

          • yata@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That is why it is technically a republic, but not in practice. The constitution says it is a republic, and they actually have an election for the role of head of state, well “election”, but of course in practice that is not how it works at all.

            The US is also technically a representative democracy, but in practice, well…

        • Z3k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not just a Republic its a people’s Republic.

          So you know like way better. That’s why they don’t need elections it already says it belongs to the people

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Sorry you prefer to choose between bad and worse every election over reaching concensus in a constituent meeting and then voting to confirm the candidate in an election, but that doesn’t make the dprk’s system less democratic

      • yata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, republic just means that the role of head of state isn’t hereditary. Lots of dictatorships are republics, some democracies are as well. The actual political system of the USA is representative democracy (in theory at least).

        The fact that these terms are so muddled in the minds of the average American is completely deliberate, because it makes it so much easier for them to subvert US democracy when people have been told that the US is not one.

    • ThatFembyWho@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well voting for people who hold the actual power but are under no obligations to help or even respect their constituents in any way… certainly doesn’t sound like a democracy to me.

      “Democracy” is what politicians say when they want people to feel like they are empowered or live in a better condition than they do. Both the left and right use it this way.

      I think of democracy like this. All citizens vote on an issue, and if over 50% approve, then we have a new policy. Only in very few and limited cases is this possible. With good reason.

      What the founders mostly feared is that “the masses” are subject to temporary strong passions and can be manipulated, leading to sudden drastic policy shifts, maybe not particularly well thought out. At the same time, with majority rule, it’s very possible to restrict and eliminate the rights of minority groups – they essentially have no voice.

      They thought they found a good solution, the problem is it requires all parties to make good faith efforts to support and uphold the purpose and structure of the (federal) republic, and to keep in mind who the citizens are, to advocate for the minority as well as the majority, as both groups have “inalienable rights” which must be considered in all matters.

  • stormtrooper@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    When he won the spot he said “good to see our democracy working” or something like that. Fucking shameless lunatic

  • Teon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Christians always try to re-history the world in their favor. They are the most dishonest hypocritical fascists.
    Then again, they stole most of what their religion allegedly stands for.

  • monolift@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m seeing lots of ‘New Speaker is [insert whatever you want that’s against humans in general] (maybe a slight over-exaggeration, but it doesn’t feel like it) But can anyone ELI5 how you all ended up in this state, and how you get back out? What’s the impact of this individual being Speaker?

  • ThatFembyWho@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So this is the alternative history they want to write eh?

    Clown, it was called the “Enlightenment Age” for a reason, people started breaking the chains of organized religion. Yes they were Christians, but they knew enough to not trust religion as a form of government.

    Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the material world are some of the founding principles, not “death, misery and suffering but maybe get lucky choosing the right god and you’ll be rewarded with eternal paradise…”

    If they founded the country on the Bible, we’d live in a theocracy with no elections and no opposition parties.

  • D3FNC [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Republicans (see, it’s right there in the name) have been openly mocking people who think we live in a democracy for literally my entire life

      • determinism2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only horseshoe theory is “america isn’t a democracy” and the critical difference is the appendment of “and that’s good, actually”.

        • Reptorian@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I hope that there’s a huge blue wave, and it stays blue, just so that I can say to them “America is a Constitutional Democracy, not a Republic”.

          • Amerikan Pharaoh@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Can we get some non-Third Way blues? Some people that actually oppose the military industrial complex, and will actually push renewables over the coal, gas, and crude that’s broiling our planet alive? 'Cause if we don’t, I sure as shit won’t be part of that wave. This current crop of dems can either get right or get gone.

            • Reptorian@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              We have those in Congress. It’s just that there’s more conservative wing of Democratic Party is more numerous, and there’s the issue of batshit-crazy right-wingers on the Republican side. Republican Party has to be extinct before left-wingers has a more significant foothold.

              • Amerikan Pharaoh@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Republican Party has to be extinct before left-wingers has a more significant foothold.

                How y’all plan to do that with the ‘more numerous’ Democrats obstructing progressive ideals just as staunchly, if not moreso than the Republicans? I don’t sell out where I stand to gain nothing; and my left hand to my gods, my right hand to my ancestors, I see no one currently worth even temporary alliance in the current day Democrat party, exactly like I see the Republicans.

                As it stands, I’d rather the whole shit fell apart than sell my principles for nil to ghoul barbarians who will waste that support, as well as my tax money, on endless war, endless subjugation, and endless climate change.

                • Reptorian@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Easy. Voting left-wing on the down ballot and putting the better of the two on top. And it works over time.