irstupid said:
Nem said:
The only thing to blame is how the US still manages to prance around democracy and liberty when they don't have a democratic system and throw completely appauling notions like "tiranny of the majority" to justify it. You know what tiranny of the majority is called? Democracy. And it's the fairest governing system there is.
While the US doesn't adopt it and keeps using outdated electoral systems created with a whole different reality in mind (aka how it was impossible to get results in just one day and different states would have to send news of their results by horse) these situations will keep happening. And i don't care wether it's left or right. It's downright shameful for the so called bastion of freedom to not even have a working democracy.
This is very simple. More votes = the will of the people. Not those guys voting over there are worth more than the ones voting over here. It completely ludicrous and the fact that it's still around is proof of the damage it has already done. The US is in a spiral of degradation due to that system and with presidents like Bush and Trump benefitting from it, it is very likely progress won't happen and even more americans are raised without proper educations, wich in turn lead to more of said president's getting elected and more lack of progress. |
First, we are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. Always have been.
Second, more votes does not equal the will of the people. The U.S. is huge. It is spread out. Yet the majority live in a FEW clustered cities. If we were a pure democracy and went vote majority wins, the presidential canidates woudl spend their entire time sitting in New York, LA, Houston and Chicago. They would "buy" their votes with campaign promises that woudl solely benefit the people who live in those cities.
|
I have heard what you have said on the subject before and i disagree. Thats not what history says, especially if you look up under WW2.
Regardless of tactics, you cannot at your own discretion decide that one person should be more valuable than another. That is not democratic or egalitarian. Its is therefore socially and moraly reprehensable.
