Opinion What does "Make America Great Again" mean to you? And how do you see it being great again?

[The Diplomat]

It was a democracy according to some definitions, and overall on the border for a lot of metrics. That's why I keep pointing out your definition is way too limited. It's how you end up with democratic rollback a lot of the time ("democracy without the democrats")

Don't forget property requirements and various other hurdles. Arguing that a country where maybe 20 percent of adults could vote is frankly crazy talk.

Your definition means modern Chin is a democracy as they have multifaceted levels of representation based on the votes of eligible citizens.

My definition is very simple and basic, but it isn't whole, obviously. Democracy is complex.

So i'll bite. What is your point?

 

[The Diplomat]

Not very diplomatic.

You delete my posts, I delete your posts.

 

[avenue94]

My definition is very simple and basic, but it isn't whole, obviously. Democracy is complex.

So i'll bite. What is your point?

I think I was comparing the myth of a static American identity with the myths we have around our democratic history. Myths are fine, they're important for nation building, but they should not be confused with actual reality.

That and also the idea that one of our values has always been freedom is insane and ahistorical. IE myth vs actual reality.

 

[Sinister]

The national identity of America is built on freedom, liberty, democracy, a pioneering spirit, individualism and a number of other things. There isn’t a period of it.

The National Identity of Japan is different than China. It’s what makes Americans who we are. We are more than just our geographical location. If there is no commonality to our beliefs there is no country.

Let me ask you something, are there differences between countries? The answer is obviously yes. Differences between cultures between different countries? Obviously, yes.

Why do you feel the need to believe that nations don’t have indenties?

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because if you're going to propose a collectivist ideology (something lefties are incessantly accused of because of the belief in egalitarianism), then you have to be sure it doesnt lead to obsessive Nationalism. The kind that breeds ethno-States with heavy policing towards dissent, traditionalism for traditionalism's sake, all of the lunacy people engage in the name of "what's best for us as ______." Especially if we put "freedom" and "individuality" in that identity (which pretty much every authoritatorn regime always has).

IMO our greatest strength WAS having an adaptive "National identity" which can easily assimilate enjoyable aspects of other cultures and new citizens looking for a place to be themselves. Homogeneity is incredibly boring. I like the fact that I can travel within my own Country and hear languages from all over the World, and eat food I've never had before, and that that wont stop as long as we dont become weird isolationists obsessed with streamlining our culture down to what a few rich and/or religious weirdos think we should be...that they themselves dont abide by.

 

[Sinister]

You delete my posts, I delete your posts.

Dont think I've ever deleted any of your posts. I prefer confrontation.

 

[The Diplomat]

I think I was comparing the myth of a static American identity with the myths we have around our democratic history. Myths are fine, they're important for nation building, but they should not be confused with actual reality.

That and also the idea that one of our values has always been freedom is insane and ahistorical. IE myth vs actual reality.

Myths are myths. We can always say that the basis of the country was bled and made for disfunction, but it always made us stronger and more unified. Sure, some say "Baseball, apple pie", and I like that stuff. Some say rap and Hollywood. Maybe country music, blues and the ability to love everything above. It's also having the ability to say what you want, *while not threating others*, without the fear of government arresting you. It's being able to love and hate your country at the same time, publicly, and not be ruined for it by your government.

It's being American.

 

[ferrisjso]

A representative democracy, at the very least, is allowing multiple parties to be voted for, then those representatives/delegates decide what is best for the state/area. I ain't the biggest fan, but this whole thing started with me correcting someone saying we aren't a direct democracy.

There is nothing tying a representative to the wishes of their people. Especially when no serious alternative to whatever angers the people about said rep is offered. They say they are representing you then do whatever they want in your name. A representative can take their victory to be a mandate for whatever tf they want it to be a mandate for.

Same goes for "voting with your wallet". A dollar is a dollar it doesn't say why it was spent how the person felt about spending it. A ballot is the same.

The only aspect of the US that is democratic is ballot initatives.

 

[The Diplomat]

Dont think I've ever deleted any of your posts. I prefer confrontation.

You didn't delete my "What you got" Israel/Hamas post towards my best bud Islam?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Don't forget property requirements and various other hurdles. Arguing that a country where maybe 20 percent of adults could vote is frankly crazy talk.

Right, the eligible population had direct influence over the formation of government via voting. Democracy.

Your definition means modern Chin is a democracy as they have multifaceted levels of representation based on the votes of eligible citizens.

But unlike China, the representatives change frequently during election cycles.

PS. You also seem unaware that the Constitution didn't come out of a democratic process. It was effectively illegal and beyond the scope of the convention. Effectively the Articles of Confederation government died at that point with an entirely new political system replacing it.

It did violate its mandate but in reality it was a series of amendments with a name change. And it was unanimously accepted by the first congress and ratified by all 13 Colonies. So not illegal

 

[Sinister]

I think I was comparing the myth of a static American identity with the myths we have around our democratic history. Myths are fine, they're important for nation building, but they should not be confused with actual reality.

That and also the idea that one of our values has always been freedom is insane and ahistorical. IE myth vs actual reality.

Dont even get me started on "promised land" myths...

 

[The Diplomat]

There is nothing tying a representative to the wishes of their people. Especially when no serious alternative to whatever angers the people about said rep is offered. They say they are representing you then do whatever they want in your name. A representative can take their victory to be a mandate for whatever tf they want it to be a mandate for.

Same goes for "voting with your wallet". A dollar is a dollar it doesn't say why it was spent how the person felt about spending it. A ballot is the same.

The only aspect of the US that is democratic is ballot initatives.

You're pro-China and a communist. I think you choose Russia over Ukraine.

So have it it.

 

[Sinister]

You didn't delete my "What you got" Israel/Hamas post towards my best bud Islam?

Nope. I have a personal rule that I dont moderate threads I participate in when in the WR, for this exact reason. You can call me whatever you want, I'm not going to edit it. What no one will ever substantiate against me is that I've used Mod power to stymie a debate.

 

[The Diplomat]

Nope. I have a personal rule that I dont moderate threads I participate in when in the WR, for this exact reason. You can call me whatever you want, I'm not going to edit it. What no one will ever substantiate against me is that I've used Mod power to stymie a debate.

Well damnit. My bad.

I have some investigating to do

To the Dippy cave!

 

[avenue94]

Right, the eligible population had direct influence over the formation of government via voting. Democracy.

This describes plenty of non-democracies.

But unlike China, the representatives change frequently during election cycles.

They do not really, but even if they did, again, this describes many non-democracies. FYI average length of of service for a rep is 8.5 years, 11.2 for senators.

It did violate its mandate but in reality it was a series of amendments with a name change.

Your two sentence clauses don't agree. At any rate, it's a fairly minor note, but like I said, conflating the US before and after the Constitution is like comparing different French republics or Chinese empires. Effectively different systems of government or regimes.

 

[The Diplomat]

@avenue94

Another attribute of being American, is defending it.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

This describes plenty of non-democracies.

They do not really, but even if they did, again, this describes many non-democracies. FYI average length of of service for a rep is 8.5 years, 11.2 for senators.

Your two sentence clauses don't agree. At any rate, it's a fairly minor note, but like I said, conflating the US before and after the Constitution is like comparing different French republics or Chinese empires. Effectively different systems of government or regimes.

Governments forming due the voting of the eligible population are democracies.

And I didn't conflate prior to the Constitution. Late 1700's meaning after Constitution

And I haven't done the math but I'm willing to bet the average congressional seat change during midterms are roughly 20-30


I think your conflating freedom and democracy

 

[avenue94]

@avenue94

Another attribute of being American, is defending it.

It can be, but I don't know how useful that view would be given nearly every country will defend their ___ness, it's kind of why countries exist in the first place. Draft riots also kind of contradict that argument, and the Civil War is interesting given I imagine your argument would be that both sides were trying to defend their concept of America. Like I said, the American identity is inherently regional and contradictory.

Ultimately, not really disagreeing with you, I just don't really know what to do with that trait or like...how to measure it among citizens?

Governments forming due the voting of the eligible population are democracies.

Even when it's 20 percent of the eligible adult population? That's a real stretch and far too low of a bar for democracy. Again, Singapore is not a functioning democracy, but your defintion says it is. As it does for China as well since within the ruling clique and those in power, there is actually some semblance of democracy and deliberation and voting.

 

[The Diplomat]

It can be, but I don't know how useful that view would be given nearly every country will defend their ___ness, it's kind of why countries exist in the first place. Draft riots also kind of contradict that argument, and the Civil War is interesting given I imagine your argument would be that both sides were trying to defend their concept of America. Like I said, the American identity is inherently regional and contradictory.

Ultimately, not really disagreeing with you, I just don't really know what to do with that trait or like...how to measure it among citizens?

Even when it's 20 percent of the eligible adult population? That's a real stretch and far too low of a bar for democracy. Again, Singapore is not a functioning democracy, but your defintion says it is. As it does for China as well since within the ruling clique and those in power, there is actually some semblance of democracy and deliberation and voting.

Would you rather Americans say "No, we're wrong. Lets bow down to the Chinese or Europeans" ?

That isn't the way to win, imo.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

It can be, but I don't know how useful that view would be given nearly every country will defend their ___ness, it's kind of why countries exist in the first place. Draft riots also kind of contradict that argument, and the Civil War is interesting given I imagine your argument would be that both sides were trying to defend their concept of America. Like I said, the American identity is inherently regional and contradictory.

Ultimately, not really disagreeing with you, I just don't really know what to do with that trait or like...how to measure it among citizens?

Even when it's 20 percent of the eligible adult population? That's a real stretch and far too low of a bar for democracy. Again, Singapore is not a functioning democracy, but your defintion says it is. As it does for China as well since within the ruling clique and those in power, there is actually some semblance of democracy and deliberation and voting.

I think you are conflating freedom and democracy too much. Either way, on the FH scale, I don't think the US would rank low on the A1 scale at any point in thr past 200 years.

 

[avenue94]

I think you are conflating freedom and democracy too much.

I would disagree. Like I said, you focus purely on a metric of "if the population votes, it's a democracy," which is far too limited. Like I said, your definition lumps in the US, with Singapore and China, as democracies, and you haven't really refuted that.

Or to make it very simple: democracies require free, fair and regular elections, and the civil liberties that allow this.