196

16508 readers

2333 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

456

Private Ownership of Social Rules is Inherently Anti-Democratic (lemmy.tf)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

97 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Remember, the social Democrats sided with the Nazis over the socialists. They’ve done it every time they’ve been given the opportunity, and will continue to do so as many times as people fall for their shtick.

“The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house."
-Audre Lorde

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It would appear that democracy benefits the rulers, as democracy alone has provided the most consistent means for those formerly in power to sleep and die in peace. And the same holds for the courtiers, nomenklatura, and apparatchiks. These sycophants need no longer dread midnight's knife and muffled cries, and the subsequent crowning of a new king. The elite and bureaucracy can retire to their farms and while away their passing years without fear — their riches and posterity intact. As I see it now, democracy is not to the advantage of the demos, it is to the advantage of the power elite. Something to think about.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is this your thoughts or a part of a larger quote? I appreciate it, even if I don’t necessarily agree with it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Part of a larger quote, but I agree with it.

I don't like representative democracy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I like representative democracy in theory, our current implementation in the US‡ has a few major issues in that each representative doesn't represent the same amount of people. And we should have a lot more representatives for the people.

Not everyone can dedicate the necessary time to be fully engaged and informed about all the intricacies that come from running a government, so some form of representation is needed. But ~500 people representing around 300 million people is not nearly enough for the national stage IMO.

‡ I'm talking about the US here because that's where I live, but I'm sure other countries have similar issues though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Agreed on your second sentence haha