• njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Cuz it’s democracy. If you wanted someone to be in office who would get everything done with no obstacles no roadblocks and no delays then you wouldn’t be looking at democracy you’d want a dictator. You can want that if you want but just be honest about it.

    • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      Lmfao, except you don’t have democracy. You have oligarchy and kleptocracy and plutocracy. You also don’t have a government that is “getting everything done without obstacles”, but pretty much the literal fucking opposite. The fact that the only alternative you can imagine to the current (non democratic, slipping in to fascism) state of affairs is a dictatorship is a problem with your lack of imagination and narrow view of the world (though granted, you were heavily indoctrinated that way), not a reflection of reality, nor the array of other ways that society can not only exist, but thrive.

      There was good reason I told you people to ask yourselves these questions - you are the ones standing in your own way with your insistence of living according to a full blown fallacy because you’re just comfortable enough with the way things are, and are too scared of change, specifically no longer holding the privileges the current system grants you in exchange for your compliance, and the idea that you might not have anyone to feel superior to.

      Until you’re willing and able to face that within yourself, I can’t help you, nor am Interested in hearing the mental gymnastics you do to justify your actively maintaining the status quo. ¯\(ツ)

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        You have oligarchy and kleptocracy and plutocracy.

        none of these are accurate, except for maybe plutocracy.

        Gerontocracy would be more accurate.

        It’s fundamentally not an oligarchy, that’s just not true. Trump didn’t do fuck all during his term for this exact reason. It’s obviously not a kleptocracy, unless you have like, actual proof of this. Trump being a good one, but that’s not a historical precedent.

        • How_do_I_computah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          If Trump did nothing then why are people so scared of him winning the election?

          How do you figure we don’t have an Oligarchy? There is more than just the executive branch of our government by the way. There’s also the Legislative, Judicial, and Black Rock.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            If Trump did nothing then why are people so scared of him winning the election?

            because a leader that does nothing is an ineffectual leader. You want a leader that does something not nothing.

            this also ignores the part where he tried to like, overthrow democracy, and ruin the government, but nobody likes to talk about that part.

            How do you figure we don’t have an Oligarchy?

            an oligarchy would be something like russia, The US as you said has multiple branches, the executive being the most front facing. You’ve got the judicial and legislative branches as well. The legislative branch (congress) is literally made up of hundreds of people. People that WE vote in.

            black rock is also not a branch of the government, they’re a private investment firm.

            • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              With citizens united, don’t you think it’s relevant that campaigns can accept large amounts of money? Like voters can see endless ads of one candidate if they have enough money. Campaigns can hire PIs to dig up dirt and air it. Money in a capitalist country confers power.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                With citizens united, don’t you think it’s relevant that campaigns can accept large amounts of money? Like voters can see endless ads of one candidate if they have enough money. Campaigns can hire PIs to dig up dirt and air it. Money in a capitalist country confers power.

                thats probably relevant, but this removes it even further from an oligarchy. And closer to a plutocracy, and if it does work it’s more of a commentary on the average populous than it is the collective society.

                Also super pac laws are pretty vague, so unless you donate directly to a campaign, which is pretty well regulated, though probably not enough. You can’t run any ads that aren’t just “tangentially relevant”

                • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Okay that’s fair about plutocracy vs oligarchy (I wasn’t the person originally arguing with you). And fair about campaigning. Thank you

                  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    yeah, really the only arguable states for the US government is plutocracy depending on how you look at it, and gerontocracy based on the sheer age of the politicians in office right now.

                    Nothing else is super applicable aside from the usual, democratic republic and various other shenanigans the US and state governments pull.

                    campaign funding is a nightmare though. They have also been opened up significantly in recent decades, which a lot of people aren’t too happy about. Personally i just think we should ban campaigning entirely.