I didn’t say ‘democracy bad’. I said systems of power do not provide the tools for their own subversion.
If a system of power grows from the influence of private wealth over a democratic institution, that institution isn’t going to spontaneously provide an option to rid itself of that influence. A democratic institution will always need extrademocratic force in order to keep corrupting influences out.
“Touch some grass, then you’ll realize that democracy is great only so long as there’s an extrademocratic means to make sure the people vote the right way!”
Right, what grass should I be touching? The grass on Mussolini’s grave?
Jesus bud, take a breath. Any grass is fine, better if it’s accompanied by some fresh air
democracy is great only so long as there’s an extrademocratic means to make sure the people vote the right way!
I didn’t say that. Extrademocratic force (e.g. protests, civil disobedience, BDS, ect) is used when democratic institutions don’t provide adequate choices, not in order to ‘make sure people vote the right way’. That’s how every civil rights movement in the US has happened since its founding.
Please, explain to me how protests and civil disobedience provide choices in an ‘extrademocratic’ way against genuinely democratic institutions.
Not how they are part of a democratic process. Not how they express the democratic will of the people. How they provide a counterbalance in an extrademocratic way, specifically.
? Sorry, i’m not actually sure what you’re asking…
Extrademocratic is just my way of describing activity that exists outside of electoral politics. Protests and civil disobedience work by pressuring systems of power through force or the threat thereof. The same way a union strike pressures an employer to make concessions in collective bargaining, a protest pressures a democratic institution to make concessions to protestors.
The threat of withholding support and lowering popular support is the vector by which democratic institutions are made to provide better choices.
Extrademocratic is just my way of describing activity that exists outside of electoral politics.
That’s definitely not what I took it as. Maybe ‘extra-electoral’ might serve better there, since, you know, extra-democratic necessarily implies outside (‘extra’) of democracy.
I didn’t say ‘democracy bad’. I said systems of power do not provide the tools for their own subversion.
If a system of power grows from the influence of private wealth over a democratic institution, that institution isn’t going to spontaneously provide an option to rid itself of that influence. A democratic institution will always need extrademocratic force in order to keep corrupting influences out.
I’m just gonna sit here for a bit. Maybe take up alcoholism.
Maybe consider logging off, touching some grass. Seems like you’re having a bit of a morning.
“Touch some grass, then you’ll realize that democracy is great only so long as there’s an extrademocratic means to make sure the people vote the right way!”
Right, what grass should I be touching? The grass on Mussolini’s grave?
Jesus bud, take a breath. Any grass is fine, better if it’s accompanied by some fresh air
I didn’t say that. Extrademocratic force (e.g. protests, civil disobedience, BDS, ect) is used when democratic institutions don’t provide adequate choices, not in order to ‘make sure people vote the right way’. That’s how every civil rights movement in the US has happened since its founding.
Please, explain to me how protests and civil disobedience provide choices in an ‘extrademocratic’ way against genuinely democratic institutions.
Not how they are part of a democratic process. Not how they express the democratic will of the people. How they provide a counterbalance in an extrademocratic way, specifically.
? Sorry, i’m not actually sure what you’re asking…
Extrademocratic is just my way of describing activity that exists outside of electoral politics. Protests and civil disobedience work by pressuring systems of power through force or the threat thereof. The same way a union strike pressures an employer to make concessions in collective bargaining, a protest pressures a democratic institution to make concessions to protestors.
The threat of withholding support and lowering popular support is the vector by which democratic institutions are made to provide better choices.
That’s definitely not what I took it as. Maybe ‘extra-electoral’ might serve better there, since, you know, extra-democratic necessarily implies outside (‘extra’) of democracy.
Fair enough - the point remains.
You’re getting spoon fed a basic political education and you still don’t get it.
“How can anyone disagree with me!? They must just not ‘get it’, unlike those of us who are enlightened enough to simp for genocide.”