Famous NZ lady

[MemeFan]

This is not splitting hairs.

The Greek city-states were democracies where individuals would meet and vote on matters of state.
That happens only in select small towns in the USA.

In the US we elect most representatives by majority vote thus we avoid the cumbersome and unstable coalition governments commony to parliamentary systems.

The House of Representatives is an example of representative democracy where most Congressional districts are roughly apportioned according to population within a state. HOWEVER the aspect of a Constitutional republic is demonstrated where regardless of population each state is guaranteed at least one representative.

The Senate is then an aspect of a Constitutional republic because each state has two Senators regardless of population size. The states are all equal in the Senate and the Senate itself is therefore not democratic at all.

The President is not directly elected by popular vote and that would be democracy. The President is elected based on the Electoral votes he receives with the Electoral votes being a function of the number of Senators and Representatives each state has. The purpose being to level out the power of the larger states to insure the representation of the smaller states.

These things do not occur in democracies.

That you do not understand or recognize the distinction is a you-problem and not a me-problem. Ditto that for @rockfox

You might want to brush up on your U.S. history with respect to our own adherence to treaties. There is a reason the Russians say the US is 'non agreement capable'.

Have you even read the Constitution lately? It is dead letter. Beyond the broad outlines of the form of government the details with respect to limits of power are entirely ignored. And even that ignores the way the uniparty and domestic intelligence have completely done an end run around the vaunted separation of powers.

@MeganC, you are very good in how system is supposed to work. Horewer, @rockfox is far better in how syatem actually is working.

Here is good article about forgotten aspect of states:

Machiavelli and the Globalists: Why the Elites Despise Independent Thought ⋆ Brownstone Institute

Where this will lead us is a genuinely open question; we find ourselves, like Machiavelli, at the beginning of something...

brownstone.org

So it neccesity to involve yourself into every issue, create new issues and never completely solve existing issues. And only way to do this is by forming various agencies, bureaus etc... Can any parliament/supreme court control them? No, thanks to number of agencies and technical knowledge needed for each agency.

Special knowledge needed for agencies means that they get to create their own rules, enforce them and run their own court. And how regular judge can understand deeply technical question when explain judge terminology and what is happening takes half of trial? Therefore agencies are in practice independent who created their own law. Just consider CDC's moratorium on rent payment during Corona stuff. They made rule with power of law on thing outside their own competence.

So in practice 99% of laws gets created by unelected uncontrollable bureaucracy, while 1% gets created by Congress. No wonder people speak of deep state.

 

[MeganC]

Have you even read the Constitution lately? It is dead letter.

No, there are still people who believe in it and who want to see the United States last into the future.

Recent rulings from Constitutional constructionist judges are heartening that the tide of Marxism can be turned back. We've won on abortion, gun control, free speech, property rights, and we've won on holding back the administrative state.

We are on the precipice of becoming a godly country again or at least working in that direction.

And the Constitution is suited only to a godly nation of people who do not need to be ruled over by a nanny state.

 

[rockfox]

No, there are still people who believe in it and who want to see the United States last into the future.

So? 9/10ths of what the Federal government does is unconsitutional. We haven't had constitutional money in over a century. We've had a standing army for I don't know how long know. The states are mere provinces. The political process is mere theater.

I'm glad there has been some move back towards Constitutionalist interpretation. But the fact of the matter is the rule of law is dead in this country. Just look at the 2020 election mess.

Even if domestic intel hadn't completely co-opted everything, the modern political party duopoly has broken the Constitution. It's vaunted checks and balances are a mute point now. The only check is the other party via elections and that's long been a sham, all the more so with the end of free and fair elections.

 

[MemeFan]

So? 9/10ths of what the Federal government does is unconsitutional. We haven't had constitutional money in over a century. We've had a standing army for I don't know how long know. The states are mere provinces. The political process is mere theater.

I'm glad there has been some move back towards Constitutionalist interpretation. But the fact of the matter is the rule of law is dead in this country. Just look at the 2020 election mess.

Even if domestic intel hadn't completely co-opted everything, the modern political party duopoly has broken the Constitution. It's vaunted checks and balances are a mute point now. The only check is the other party via elections and that's long been a sham, all the more so with the end of free and fair elections.

Only thing which seems to be working is seizing local/state power and disregarding federales.

 

[MeganC]

The only check is the other party via elections

No, there is another check that the people can use but so far the people are much more willing to tolerate tyranny than the Americans of 1775 were.

 

[DawoodSaar]

Most people who have a say these days actually prefer tyranny. Strange how as the population of voters becomes increasingly female, the ladies pick tyranny.

Considering that a core element of women is that they do not desire personal authority or responsibility, they vote in people who take it away from others. For marriage that makes perfect sense; but for politics???

 

[MemeFan]

Most people who have a say these days actually prefer tyranny. Strange how as the population of voters becomes increasingly female, the ladies pick tyranny.

Considering that a core element of women is that they do not desire personal authority or responsibility, they vote in people who take it away from others. For marriage that makes perfect sense; but for politics???

It's classic.

Scare people off and provide solution where all power flows to you.

White pill is how much fear elite needs to put into people's hearts in order to grab power. They have tried to make coof civilization ending disease.

 

[rockfox]

No, there is another check that the people can use but so far the people are much more willing to tolerate tyranny than the Americans of 1775 were.

Men fight less for liberty as for their family. Marriage is destroyed. What do people have to fight for anymore? There will be no revolt until people have no other choice for survival. And even that is unlikely as the oligarchs have mastered the arts of propaganda, bread & circuses and tax farming.

How many genocides have been stopped by revolt? I can think of lots that haven't but none that have.

 

[MemeFan]

Men fight less for liberty as for their family. Marriage is destroyed. What do people have to fight for anymore? There will be no revolt until people have no other choice for survival. And even that is unlikely as the oligarchs have mastered the arts of propaganda, bread & circuses and tax farming.

How many genocides have been stopped by revolt? I can think of lots that haven't but none that have.

Don't forgot how some things are made rights and seen as useful. Health insurance, pensions etc.. Off course, payable with other's people money.