• 13 Posts
  • 392 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • Cuba (country right next to the US) aligned itself with the USSR after Castro’s revolution, and the US has attempted to coup them, invade them, murder their leaders, then sink them in isolation and starvation. I’ve always defended that Cuba had the right of self-determination for their own foreign and domestic policy, and that the US was in the wrong for retaliating against them.

    It would be extremely hypocritical of me to defend that Ukraine has no right to self-determine whether they want to be in a defensive pact or not, and whether they want to join the EU or not, just because a third country would like them not to do so - just as it’s extremely hypocritical of tankies and campists to say that Cuba had the right to choose their own future but Ukraine doesn’t.




  • I actually disagree with this sentiment.

    There’s clearly a split in the Democratic Party regarding the candidates and leanings of the old guard, vs a very large portion of their voter base that wants structural reforms in the country (universal public healthcare VS increased access to insurance, for instance), and I bet a large portion of the latter feel whipped into having to vote for a lesser evil rather than for a political project they actually have passion for.

    Meanwhile, Trump was an outsider of the Republican party who managed to get their voters in love with him, to the point that he managed to hijack the party and leave it ripe open for a transformation from neoconservative to proto-fascist, despite the Republican old guard initially being hostile towards him.

    The Republican party has managed to stay competitive, despite their political goals being less popular overall in the US than the Dems’, precisely because they allowed themselves to mutate and stay responsive to the changes in the electorate, the obvious tragedy being that democratic institutions (mostly referring to both political parties) have been far more willing to incorporate far right nutjobs who want to end democracy than they have for left-wing populism that wants to make housing affordable.




  • Contemporary governments deal with taxation, healthcare, security, defense, education, law, labor rights, minority rights, infrastructure, prison systems, regulations of industries, and so on and so on and so on. It’s very unlikely to find one person capable of having in-depth knowledge of all of these areas to properly defend their party’s leanings on all of them in parliamentary debates, and even if you did, those parties are still going to need experts who draw the master lines of their policy proposals, and those experts need to be paid.



  • If you aren’t voting for one specific person to be your representative, but rather, for the party as a whole, you generally want individual representatives to follow the party line, unless there’s some sort of unusual drama that splits opinions long after the last elections.

    In countries such as the US and the UK, you usually vote for one person to represent your territory, but in elections such as the European ones, because you’re voting for lists of people to represent your country, you’re actually voting for a party.

    No idea about how Australian democracy works, though.




  • The Judiciary has decided that the Executive must not be beholden to neither the Legislative nor the Judiciary. This is terrible, because it breaks the separation of powers. Now, if only the Executive wasn’t beholden to any of the other powers to force the Judiciary to go back to reason… Oh, wait.

    Irony aside: no, this isn’t a matter of not having standards, this is a matter of making sure that democracy is capable of perpetuating itself. If the organism gets infected by a virus that intends to mutate the whole thing into a degenerated parody of itself, it must send its antibodies. Not doing so means letting the last line of defense fall all by itself, which is even against the very spirit of the law.










  • “The scary socialist madman” accompanied by the Democratic Party apparatus? A presidential candidate Sanders along with a moderate liberal VP would have gotten both the traditional Democratic vote (as long as the party collaborated with him, rather than giving him the Corbyn treatment, which I don’t trust liberals not to do) and a considerable chunk of the electorate who doesn’t feel represented by either party. The day you guys understand that you don’t have to fight the Republicans in traditional terms, but rather, to change the coordinates of the fight, you’ll force Republicans to choose between evolving or getting buried. But the real problem by this point is whether it is too late.