What do you believe is the fundamental problem with [American] government?

What do you believe is the fundamental problem with [American] government?

  • I don't believe a government should exist. That society would be better off without

  • Poor creation/execution of legislation

  • Incompetence/Inability/Ineptitude

  • Corruption

  • The authority of government: Executive orders v. Addressing Congress

  • The size of the government: Big v. Small

  • Efficiency of government

  • Racism/sexism/classism/other/etc.

  • Capitalism*

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.

smokinrav

Well-Known Member
Which is, of course, exactly how Europe managed to avoid war as it climbed to equality and self-government from the rubble of autocratic states squabbling for status and influence…which…[paper rustling] didn’t happen.


Please share your sources of information - except for yours, there are no dependable records of human civilization 10,000 years ago - or even 3000 years ago, so you really should let the world see them! I’m sure it will revolutionize our understanding not only of history in detail, but of the evolution of human society itself. You could make huge bank giving researchers access - you really ought to do it!

Or, maybe you know as much about those 10,000 years as you do about the period I mentioned that you took exception to. Which is to say, not enough to back you up.
Really? You've never heard of the Egyptian people? They have reliable monarch histories going back 5000 years and used enslaved people to build the relics we so admire today. You know, kind of like how America was built by slaves.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
So, Chinese government.

Do you think the current oligarchy/plutocracy will last another 50 years? I don't.
why not? it may fall because it can't compete with outside competition, but they surely aren't going top step aside gracefully, they're going to kick and scream and make a huge scene...and those drama queens have nuclear weapons at their disposal. there may be a transition of power, but it sure as fuck isn't going to be peaceful or orderly
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
There is a large working class that is educated, aware they are being taken advantage of and able to wrest control away from those who hold power when the time is ripe.
which won't go well at all...too many factions want different things, and they won't cooperate with each other. it will be a huge clusterfuck of lying, betrayal, recrimination, chaos, infighting, and just straight up killing anyone who stands in the way of your goals...can you even imagine an armed insurrection in this country not turning into a huge melee free for all, where the weak get eaten first, then the strong turn on each other, till the victors claim the arid waste land left?...do you think the trumptard army would have remained in control of the capitol, or trump would have remained in the whitehouse if 1-6 would have went better for them? every state in the union with a high dem/lib population and government would have seceded and sent their national guard units in to take the whitehouse back, and then track down trump...and none of them would have gone quietly.....and of course, not one foreign power would have even been tempted to take advantage of the situation, perhaps to the point on invasion....
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
You could go further back. Let’s not forget the Greeks had a little fling with democracy too.
yes they did. It wasn't anything like universal suffrage but Athens (just Athens, not all of Greece) was one of the innovators of Democracy,. It didn't last. Even the ultra authoritarian Rome had it's period where people's votes mattered. Actually it was the time when Rome expanded into empire. Once the empire was established, Emperors replaced the Senate as the ruling body. From Rome came hereditary monarchs and divine rule, which lasted in some parts of Europe into the 20th century.

This time is different. Places like Canada, Australia and the US would consider rule by a dictator an anomoly, not something that a normal nation would find acceptable. The paradigm of monarchy is no longer seen as a modern way to govern. But that is recent. We don't really know how to live together yet. Democracy is better than monarchy but maybe there is another way. Right now, we don't have a better alternative.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
which won't go well at all...too many factions want different things, and they won't cooperate with each other. it will be a huge clusterfuck of lying, betrayal, recrimination, chaos, infighting, and just straight up killing anyone who stands in the way of your goals...can you even imagine an armed insurrection in this country not turning into a huge melee free for all, where the weak get eaten first, then the strong turn on each other, till the victors claim the arid waste land left?...do you think the trumptard army would have remained in control of the capitol, or trump would have remained in the whitehouse if 1-6 would have went better for them? every state in the union with a high dem/lib population and government would have seceded and sent their national guard units in to take the whitehouse back, and then track down trump...and none of them would have gone quietly.....and of course, not one foreign power would have even been tempted to take advantage of the situation, perhaps to the point on invasion....
completely agree.

I am flummoxed when people talk about civil war and revolution as if it is something desirable. Fuck their revolution. I want my kids to make it to old age. Let's find a different path..
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
yes they did. It wasn't anything like universal suffrage but Athens (just Athens, not all of Greece) was one of the innovators of Democracy,. It didn't last. Even the ultra authoritarian Rome had it's period where people's votes mattered. Actually it was the time when Rome expanded into empire. Once the empire was established, Emperors replaced the Senate as the ruling body. From Rome came hereditary monarchs and divine rule, which lasted in some parts of Europe into the 20th century.

This time is different. Places like Canada, Australia and the US would consider rule by a dictator an anomoly, not something that a normal nation would find acceptable. The paradigm of monarchy is no longer seen as a modern way to govern. But that is recent. We don't really know how to live together yet. Democracy is better than monarchy but maybe there is another way. Right now, we don't have a better alternative.
would it be way out of line to suggest that we have some kind of testing to decides who gets to vote?
if you can't pick your candidates platform from a multiple choice set of answers, if you have no idea how they've voted on previous important issues,
if you have no fucking clue what the important issues of the election are...then maybe just shut the fuck up and go back to facebook and let the grown ups get on with their thing?
rights come paired with responsibilities, if you wish to exercise those rights, you should be required to shoulder those responsibilities...like knowing why the fuck you're voting for who you're voting for, and "Kanye says this guy is the shit"...is not a fucking acceptable answer, neither is "they're the right color" or "they're the wrong color" or even "they're the wrong religion"...
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
completely agree.

I am flummoxed when people talk about civil war and revolution as if it is something desirable. Fuck their revolution. I want my kids to make it to old age. Let's find a different path..
i was just prophesying and extrapolating
point out a path, even an overgrown, steep, muddy one, and i'll give it a shot, but good luck getting the rank and file to get out of lockstep long enough to make the turn off the beaten path
 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
i was just prophesying and extrapolating
point out a path, even an overgrown, steep, muddy one, and i'll give it a shot, but good luck getting the rank and file to get out of lockstep long enough to make the turn off the beaten path
I'm a big believer in democracy and representative government. It's not a perfect answer because sometimes people vote for a government that takes those rights away. But democracy and free and fair elections. That's my answer.
 

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
i think you did have a point...Societal changes have made the working class less important, their work can be farmed out to foreign interests, they vote less than white collar people, they're usually too busy to attend protests...as a whole, they're less important to the political system than they once were, and they're concentrated into certain areas, where it's easy to manipulate what they see on billboards, what kind of businesses they have access to, even what kind of food they eat. they're still the largest class, with the smallest voice, and the largest "opiate of the masses " consumption...mma fights, "reality" tv, the overblown importance of celebrity, ridiculous, outrageous podcasts and radio programs promoting insane paranoid conspiracy theories with no proof and no fear of censure....
they don't need a "party of the people" they need to wake the fuck up and remember they are people
Interesting.
So if voting was compulsory in America, I know, i know a contentious point but IF it was would America see a big step towards a more Social government and society?
 

CunningCanuk

Well-Known Member
yes they did. It wasn't anything like universal suffrage but Athens (just Athens, not all of Greece) was one of the innovators of Democracy,. It didn't last. Even the ultra authoritarian Rome had it's period where people's votes mattered. Actually it was the time when Rome expanded into empire. Once the empire was established, Emperors replaced the Senate as the ruling body. From Rome came hereditary monarchs and divine rule, which lasted in some parts of Europe into the 20th century.
The Roman example is interesting. A popular demagogue trying to replace a democratic republic with a dictatorship. Fortunately, trump wasn’t as successful as Caesar was.

This time is different. Places like Canada, Australia and the US would consider rule by a dictator an anomoly, not something that a normal nation would find acceptable. The paradigm of monarchy is no longer seen as a modern way to govern. But that is recent. We don't really know how to live together yet. Democracy is better than monarchy but maybe there is another way. Right now, we don't have a better alternative.
I agree it’s different today but democracy is just as fragile now as it was 2000 years ago. The Roman people allowed Caesar to become emperor because they wanted it. Today in the US, 40% of people would replace their democratic republic with a trump dictatorship.

The weakest link in any democracy is the people itself.
 

CunningCanuk

Well-Known Member
would it be way out of line to suggest that we have some kind of testing to decides who gets to vote?
if you can't pick your candidates platform from a multiple choice set of answers, if you have no idea how they've voted on previous important issues,
if you have no fucking clue what the important issues of the election are...then maybe just shut the fuck up and go back to facebook and let the grown ups get on with their thing?
rights come paired with responsibilities, if you wish to exercise those rights, you should be required to shoulder those responsibilities...like knowing why the fuck you're voting for who you're voting for, and "Kanye says this guy is the shit"...is not a fucking acceptable answer, neither is "they're the right color" or "they're the wrong color" or even "they're the wrong religion"...
The problem with this is that it’s a very slippery slope.

I say make it easy for everyone to vote and make it difficult to spread lies and misinformation.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
The Roman example is interesting. A popular demagogue trying to replace a democratic republic with a dictatorship. Fortunately, trump wasn’t as successful as Caesar was.

I agree it’s different today but democracy is just as fragile now as it was 2000 years ago. The Roman people allowed Caesar to become emperor because they wanted it.
Today in the US, 40% of people would replace their democratic republic with a trump dictatorship.

The weakest link in any democracy is the people itself.
20% tops.
 

CunningCanuk

Well-Known Member
76million/330million is about 23% that voted for Trump, His support dropped a lot after Jan 6 failed insurrection.

And just found this too, so might be as low as 6% now days support Trump. (21/330)

View attachment 4996401
Comparing votes cast against the total population will not give an accurate assessment, IMO.

Can we agree that whatever the number is, it’s much higher than it should be?
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Comparing votes cast against the total population will not give an accurate assessment, IMO.

Can we agree that whatever the number is, it’s much higher than it should be?
Numbers are relative IMO. Just because it is 'big' doesn't mean that it is big reletive to the people who will do everything they can to make sure that he won't get back in office.

Also it's estimated that about 25% of the population has some kind of mental issue (not sure what the right terms are to not be offensive) so it is not surprising that a big number of people would feel more comfortable with a fascist dictator, even if they are a crooked idiot. Add into the online propaganda and I'm sure that just makes it that much larger of a number.

But still I would say easily less that 20% of our country is in the Trump cult.

It just seems like a lot more because of all the money they are spending online to push the spam highlighting the crazies and amplifying their bullshit.

But yeah I do agree it is too big of a number.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Interesting.
So if voting was compulsory in America, I know, i know a contentious point but IF it was would America see a big step towards a more Social government and society?
no...actually i think it would be close. 75% of this country is bat shit insane...and that's no joke, it's my real, heartfelt personal observation, from traveling a lot when i as younger, and now living in a tourist area where we get people from all over the country. crazy trumptard are just the icing on the cake, many people who seem "normal" aren't normal at all if you bother to talk to them for a minute of two.
Some people here want socialism, but aren't intelligent enough to know thats what they're saying they want. if you call it socialism, they'll get offended and tell you they aren't communist....no, you're a socialist...they want it, but don't even know what it's called, and think it's totalitarian communism, which also isn't what they perceive it to be.
i had a chat with a group of young people in the parking lot of the grocery store. they were ffa kids in town for a convention, and i heard one of them call democrats socialist, in a disparaging way. i asked him if he knew what socialism really was, and he described communism. i told him that that was communism, and that socialism was kind of like communism lite....communist don't actually own anything, the government owns ALL property, and allow you the use of it, where socialism allows for private property, only industrial production is communally owned, and overseen by a democratically elected government, and that almost universally, communism comes with a violent overthrow of the preceding government, while socialist hardly ever resort to anything beyond the democratic process. i told them (ideally) communism rewards everyone equally, whether they actually do anything productive or not, while socialism rewards people based on their individual contributions to the economy. They were all looking at me like i was insane...that's not what our teacher told us...yeah, well, teachers are people, and they can make mistakes, and apparently your teacher is misinformed, and is passing that misinformation on...do your own reading.
the point being...people are fucking stupid and too lazy to inform themselves...sitting in a comfortable chair, in an air conditioned room, reading information from reputable websites is too much work for 90% of them...they have no idea what they're actually supporting, or condemning, or why they're doing either one, they listen to established authority figures, who apparently aren't much better informed than they are, and who may be pushing personal agendas which are entirely inappropriate to be teaching anyone, no matter their age.
so if you REQUIRED all of them to vote, who the fuck knows what would happen, because most of them have no idea what it is they're voting for, which is why i'd like to see some kind of basic requirements before people are allowed to vote
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
The Roman example is interesting. A popular demagogue trying to replace a democratic republic with a dictatorship. Fortunately, trump wasn’t as successful as Caesar was.



I agree it’s different today but democracy is just as fragile now as it was 2000 years ago. The Roman people allowed Caesar to become emperor because they wanted it. Today in the US, 40% of people would replace their democratic republic with a trump dictatorship.

The weakest link in any democracy is the people itself.
imagine what would happen if a respected military retiree, with some charisma and gravitas ran for president, got elected, and tried the same thing?...instead of a cheeto colored moronic chimp...
 
Top