SCOTUS replacement for RBG

Ivy Mike

Member
*sigh* I don't recall ever seeing the Wetlands initiative on a ballot anywhere. Nor the so-called Assault Weapons bill and never once the minutia of the federal or state budget. In a democracy that would be required for them to became the law of the land. Keep in mind that the old Soviet Union and the National Socialist German Workers' Party also had elections. It's been said that even the residents of hell are allowed to vote... at least voting absentee for the city of Chicago... They must have all been democracies as well.
If you're having to resort to extremes to make your point, you're probably in need of a bit of a re-think. You're trying to conflate the process of democracy with an actual direct democracy as a state.

A democracy is not just a direct democracy where people vote on absolutely everything. You can have a representative democracy as well.
Switzerland has been doing that for a couple centuries at this point.
But the point here is that Democracy is not a system of government except in very specific circumstances. American Democracy refers to the process of citizen control. Some countries have more than others but in our Republic, we exercise it fairly liberally. The only real holdouts are things like cabinet appointments and the goofy Electoral College system that needs to go.
 

Selena

Member
If you're having to resort to extremes to make your point, you're probably in need of a bit of a re-think. You're trying to conflate the process of democracy with an actual direct democracy as a state.

A democracy is not just a direct democracy where people vote on absolutely everything. You can have a representative democracy as well.
Switzerland has been doing that for a couple centuries at this point.
But the point here is that Democracy is not a system of government except in very specific circumstances. American Democracy refers to the process of citizen control. Some countries have more than others but in our Republic, we exercise it fairly liberally. The only real holdouts are things like cabinet appointments and the goofy Electoral College system that needs to go.
Unfortunately for your dialog there is no American democracy. Using the process then claiming the title is... Quite frankly my youngest outgrew that tactic a year ago at age 12. Since I am not familiar with the Swiss system I am not qualified to comment. As for the Electoral College... that is the hallmark of a republic. To change that you would need a super-majority vote from the states which is the further hallmark of a republic.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
Unfortunately for your dialog there is no American democracy. Using the process then claiming the title is... Quite frankly my youngest outgrew that tactic a year ago at age 12. Since I am not familiar with the Swiss system I am not qualified to comment. As for the Electoral College... that is the hallmark of a republic. To change that you would need a super-majority vote from the states which is the further hallmark of a republic.
The Electoral College is not a hallmark of a Republic. It's an outdated piece of our Republic. No other republic on Earth uses such a system.

I'm not sure why you think there is no American Democracy when we are having an election in 4 days time in which tens of millions of Americans are directly voting for Senate seats, House seats, some governors, state and local representatives and ballot initiatives. We are literally closing out one congress and initiating a new one and quite possibly changing out the entire Executive branch. You even reference needing a super majority of states to change the EC. What are those super majority of states going to do?
They're going to vote. It's another democratic process.
That entire process IS democracy. Your youngest is probably aware of this thing called a vocabulary word and that these things have meanings.

Democracy
noun
noun: democracy
  1. a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
    "capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world"
    • a state governed by a democracy.
      plural noun: democracies
      "a multiparty democracy"
    • control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
      "the intended extension of industrial democracy"



  2. The United States is not a direct democracy in and of itself, but it is a Republic with a strong Democratic tradition. We practice Democracy and our Republic could not function as written in our constitution, without it.
 
Last edited:

Selena

Member
The Electoral College is not a hallmark of a Republic. It's an outdated piece of our Republic. No other republic on Earth uses such a system.

I'm not sure why you think there is no American Democracy when we are having an election in 4 days time in which tens of millions of Americans are directly voting for Senate seats, House seats, some governors, state and local representatives and ballot initiatives. We are literally closing out one congress and initiating a new one and quite possibly changing out the entire Executive branch. You even reference needing a super majority of states to change the EC. What are those super majority of states going to do?
They're going to vote. It's another democratic process.
That entire process IS democracy. Your youngest is probably aware of this thing called a vocabulary word and that these things have meanings.

Democracy
noun
noun: democracy
  1. a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
    "capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world"
    • a state governed by a democracy.
      plural noun: democracies
      "a multiparty democracy"
    • control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
      "the intended extension of industrial democracy"


  2. The United States is not a direct democracy in and of itself, but it is a Republic with a strong Democratic tradition. We practice Democracy and our Republic could not function as written in our constitution, without it.
*sigh* Are the duly elected representatives of the US able to change the laws set by the Constitution by a simple majority? If your answer is no you must agree this is not a democracy. If your answer is yes you are sadly mis-educated and not worth the time to argue with you.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
*sigh* Are the duly elected representatives of the US able to change the laws set by the Constitution by a simple majority? If your answer is no you must agree this is not a democracy. If your answer is yes you are sadly mis-educated and not worth the time to argue with you.
False dichotomy. You assume that a democracy must use a simple majority for everything. There is no such hard and fast rule. You can even have representative democracies.

Also, I never said the USA is a direct democracy. I said it practices democracy. It uses the democratic process.

You are now resorting to blatant logical fallacies. You should really rethink this worldview of yours.
 

Selena

Member
False dichotomy. You assume that a democracy must use a simple majority for everything. There is no such hard and fast rule. You can even have representative democracies.

Also, I never said the USA is a direct democracy. I said it practices democracy. It uses the democratic process.

You are now resorting to blatant logical fallacies. You should really rethink this worldview of yours.
No, you are talking out of a poor education. You need to study the basis of the theory of US government. I would suggest Locke and Rousseau but quite frankly I doubt you would understand the philosophy.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
No, you are talking out of a poor education. You need to study the basis of the theory of US government. I would suggest Locke and Rousseau but quite frankly I doubt you would understand the philosophy.
You don't even know what democracy is. So stop trying to name drop things you haven't even read yourself.

Besides, Bakunin > Rousseau
 
Frankly, every society that has claimed to be socialist has quickly devolved into a functional aristocracy where the leadership cannot be questioned and an outcast class must be purged.
I don't want to create that scenario.
It is often said that communism is the system of heaven but it requires angels to make it work.
That is equally true of socialism, it's weaker sister.
 

Selena

Member
You don't even know what democracy is. So stop trying to name drop things you haven't even read yourself.

Besides, Bakunin > Rousseau

And tell me... which of the designers of the Constitution were inspired by the philosophy of Bakunin? I thought the subject was the philosophy behind the Republic of the United States. Not the ravings of lunatics who's theories were proven false about 1989. I'm done with you, I have no interest in conversations where taking the the other seriously is an insult to his intelligence.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
And tell me... which of the designers of the Constitution were inspired by the philosophy of Bakunin? I thought the subject was the philosophy behind the Republic of the United States. Not the ravings of lunatics who's theories were proven false about 1989. I'm done with you, I have no interest in conversations where taking the the other seriously is an insult to his intelligence.
The subject was you trying to push this false idea that Democracy and Republics are somehow mutually exclusive or somehow incompatible.
Even when shown multiple examples, you continually use logical fallacies to try and support your claims (hint: if you have to use fallacies, your claim is likely false) and then tell me to go read enlightenment philosophers.
But here's the thing, all the enlightenment philosophers are not going to be able to prove anything when the real issue is that you don't understand that Democracy can be a system of government OR a process by which governments operate. Or you do understand and simply wish to continue arguing because you can't accept that your sorry little 'it's a republic, not a democracy' trope has been dismissed as nothing more that elementary wordplay. I never claimed the USA to be a democracy and I won't defend such a claim.

It would have been difficult for any founder to have been inspired by the philosophy of Bakunin seeing as he wasn't born until 1814. However, I can see several serious advantages, had Bakunin been a primary source of inspiration. He was a radical abolitionist for one, which would have been useful if you were a black slave in the newly founded nation. While he was generally supportive of the Republican movement active in Europe at the time, he also recognized the chance that a Republic could become more despotic than a Monarchy.
But it makes sense that the founders of the US would more closely align with Rousseau. Their position as powerful, important members of the upper crust would be defended and entrenched by the very system of government they created. Bakunin correctly saw right through the supposed liberty espoused by Rousseau and was dead on when he called it egoistic and shabby.
 
Top