hector

You're not talking about what esteem we hold the government's in, or they're assorted ills. We are talking about the structure of government, being representative, or being autocratic. You can say but those representative governments were mean! No shit? That is not what is an issue here. You could discount any event from history with the logic you are trying to use here.

When the Constitution was written if you had land you could vote, it did not matter if it was a million Acres or a half an acre. You each got one vote. Also there really were very few manufacturing workers, like 90% was in agriculture.

Now you want to talk about the failings of the western governments go ahead, I am the first to bring those up. But it would be a whole lot worse with a one-party state. A lot worse. We have different groups of people and deep divisions within our groups and the worst people in the country in charge. At least some of these other large autocracies have a smart person in charge evil and ruthless though they may be. We have evil ruthless and utterly malicious. Nihilistic. We are not starting with Octavian caesar, but with caracalla.

Now if you think Western governments are worse towards their citizens than Eastern ones I would straight up disagree. Due to honest elections we have extracted more from lawmakers than an autocrat who's only fear would be a bloody Revolution.

As I referred to classically, it refers to 2,000 years ago or more. Which for a few centuries they had been subjugated by the Greeks and then Romans, the rulers of which adopted Eastern norms and declared themselves God and ruled as an all-powerful monarch.

It is not a misunderstanding of the intentions so much as they are playing by the old rules where you do not call something for what it is out of polity.

An old decorum only exercised by the weak Democratic establishment now.

The Republicans do more than call out for what it is, they lie and accuse you of being the problem for their own perversions. But our Democrats refuse to even truthfully call a problem.

Well do not stop there, you should explain why the other side doesn't get more votes. Because the opposition party is worthless at best. Being better than the other guy has never been enough to comfortably win elections and we already knew that but that is the only thing we are offering. The way to get elected is not to be half as Republican as the republicans, it is to be Champion popular reform and loudly fight for it. To call out villains by name, to have a, to have a fucking spine.

We are doomed with this same opposition party and Power and they are despite the last election. We should all agree that's a failure. Nobody answers for that? We allowed the same power Brokers to do the next one?

Most of the referendum laws sponsored by voters are Constitutional Amendments that take an extra supermajority of 3/4 I think to overturn them. Others like Florida it is just statutory law and when they passed that law allowing felons to vote the lawmakers just jammed it up with other laws so only like 200 of them were registered to vote election time.

Part of the difference now is that before it was the National Security type people that had the information, no the politicians themselves will be able to access it, as well as numerous outside groups able to hack the system. So it is a world of difference even if the internet is compromised on a basic level. Especially now with these computer programs able to sort and make assumptions however unfounded about people.

Tesla is already 100 times overvalued at a minimum, this would be 800 times. Their intrinsic value is not more than 10 billion, and that is before Elon alienated half of the West with his Nazi bullshit and government actions.

Holy shit, you did not make a typo, that is real they're proposing to give him that. Holy shit, or Unholy shit as the case may be

Oh my God this is the dumbest logic that the rich sponsor to derail any example to meet from the great generation. Because everything was not perfect nothing from that era counts.

You could not use a single example from history with that logic. You could discredit anything anyone has done ever if there was injustice.

Give me one example, one historical example that could be used while not being discounted because their society was not perfect?

And regardless a minimum wage job paid for life, the factory job paid for a downright prosperous life, antitrust laws were enforced, we paid a reasonable amount of money for goods, and so forth.

The Soviet Union got ganged up on by all the capitalist countries because everyone was scared shitless of socialism, all the super rich made sure they were attacked in any way possible, at one point they were fighting on 17 different fronts with the largest standing army the world has ever seen.

All of those attacks I believe led to their army gaming an outsized power that allowed them to seize control with a strong man and turning the government against what it should have been.

Stalin was a monster by all accounts. Maybe if Lennon or Trotsky were leading things it could have been different. Trotsky who got ice picked in the head by an assassin in Mexico City at a speech he was giving, by stalin's agent.

As to the Democratic conventions, it was all fixed. There was some degree of voting at the beginning right after the revolution, the Bolsheviks got elected and then they got voted out the next Congress or whatever they called it and they kept power. Very few if any of their elections were honest to my knowledge.

Maybe that is part of the problem, do not look left or right, look up.