| ▲ | coretx 3 days ago | |
> I think with with IT they do realise that they do not know. We are no longer living in the 2000's. They know. Many are simply evil or have competing interests and want to loose their income/career. Regarding your parent, "direct democracy" is a euphemism for mob rule. | ||
| ▲ | psychoslave 3 days ago | parent [-] | |
>Regarding your parent, "direct democracy" is a euphemism for mob rule. Anything that pretend to be democracy without imposing active participation of citizen in ruling is an euphemism for some other system which doesn’t dare to present itself for what it is. Oligarchy is not democracy. Aristocracy is not democracy. Assimilating the only actual form of democracy to its degenerated ochlocratic form, and pretending that whatever undemocratic political regime that officially brand itself as democratic is so: thus are the two basic strategy of newspeak control. War is peace. Yes there is a risk with actual democracy. The full truth however is that there are risks of degeneration with any political system. Pseudo-representative systems used in western side have by far cross the threshold of mere theoretical possibility to degenerate into oligarchic plutocracies. Moreover which caste brandishes the scarecrow of the hypothetical fickle crowd to evict actual democracy? And in support of which system, and what caste will it favor? The nailing point of democracy is not that it’s perfect and immune of any big issue. The cardinal point of democracy is that people are promised the pains and joys they will self-provide for themselves; so the control feedback loop of changing their own behaviors and rules stay in their power. # Related resources | ||