This is bernie sanders’ fault

      • Orcocracy [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Do they teach that line at schools in the US? I’ve seen Americans on the internet mention it very regularly, but it just seems so odd. Some (liberal) democracies are monarchies and some are republics. Why do Americans all seem to think those things are mutually exclusive?

          • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It’s amusing when Americans stumble across international politics and get upset when people use words like “democrat,” “republican,” “liberal” in ways almost entirely different from the American concepts

            They can’t wrap their head around the fact that Bolsonaro and Shinzo Abe are liberals lol

            • CTHlurker [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              8 months ago

              Even funnier was the guy who got upset that Shinzo Abe was referred to as a conservative, when he in fact had been the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party or whatever it’s called. The guy just could not understand that a part can be called liberal and still be conservative.

        • GinAndJuche [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          8 months ago

          Not explicitly. However, many textbooks (thanks Texas) provide ample room for a teacher to veer into “representative republic” discourse.

          To answer the second part, our history education is very focused on an a “progression of the west” ice of history. They first teach us about the revolution, then the continental strains of thought that led to it, Ancient Greece into to the Rome, so on and so forth in that it presents a deeply Eurocentric perspective from an american propaganda perspective.

          The hinge point is that part of Americas internal propaganda is that direct democracy is dangerous. They point to oligarchy of Athens (I. Different terms) as good. They point to the monarchy fascist whatever you call Sparta and say “had some good ideas but took it too far”.

          The Rome education is very Optimates biased, after all, “if bread and circus buys them they are proof that society needs stewards”. It’s just elitist bullshit. America always was, by, and for those who abused their power to lark as the romans.

          Point is, direct democracy is portrayed as antithetical to the “holy will” of the founding fathers (praise be upon them) and their sacred writ if the constitution.

        • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          8 months ago

          Because they’re dumber than dogshit.

          We’re a democratic republic, like you said they arent mutually exclusive but even the chuds figured out just yelling “fuck democracy” isn’t a good look.

          It’d be like if you said you can’t get mad that your car cant drive because it’s not a car it’s a Toyota.

        • VILenin [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          8 months ago

          Schrodinger’s America: it’s a democracy when you bloviate about China bad, but a repuuuuuublic when your glass house comes back to bite you

          • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            Two sides existing in mutual opposition while a third more accurate analysis gets rejected. Perfect for our stupid two party system that mirrors it.

        • mar_k [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          It’s a conservative thing, they love to pull out the “we’re a constitutional republic, democracy is MOB RULE!!” line to own the libs when they complain about the electoral college

          Realistically “republic” just means “non-monarchy,” i.e. a system of representatives (democratically elected or not) instead of a monarch. 90% of the world from North Korea to Yemen are constitutional republics.

        • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Do they teach that line at schools in the US?

          Sometimes. Most people hear it when they express disappointment with the dogshit it churns out and get it gets used as a way of scolding them.

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        So is the Republic of South Africa, yet South Africa still a multi party parliamentary democracy that abides by one person one vote. Being a republic doesn’t mean that you have to implement an anti democratic system by default lmao.

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    USA democracy moment™®

    33.3%, or 1/3 of US elections in the 21st century have ended up like this by the way. And in 16.6% or 1/6 of elections in the 21st century, the partisan courts have refused to do a recount that would lead to the candidate favoured by the partisan court losing the election. And in another 1/6 (lol) of elections in the 21st century, supporters of the losing candidate stormed the Capitol and were treated with kids gloves by the state security forces and the police, and were even assisted by them.

    And yet they preach about "democracy.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      8 months ago

      the partisan courts have refused to do a recount

      Worse. They intervened to stop a recount, in concert with a collection of paid protesters (aka, The Brooks Brothers Rioters), for the purpose of overturning an election.

    • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      Democracy so cool and good like nobody else on earth implemented one like it afterward. Truly, how wise our founding fathers were that everybody else saw how they did it and said “lol fuck that noise.”

    • tripartitegraph [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Lol and Kavanaugh and Barrett, who are now LIFETIME appointments to the Supreme Court, directly worked on Bush’s legal team pushing to stop the recount in 2000. Chief Justice John Roberts was an adviser to the governor of Florida, Bush’s brother Jeb, during that time as well. But yeah, “wOrLd’S oLdEsT dEmOcRaCy

      • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        In fairness to Ceredigion, any fair voting method would yield the same result. It’s a coin flip between plaid and labour, and the voters don’t particularly mind either. It was the lib dems before that, and while they are usually yellow Tories, Mark Williams is alright.

        The system is ridiculous though.

  • VILenin [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Reposting a previous comment

    There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States.

    For the non-yanks, when you tick the box next to “Genocide Joe”, you aren’t actually voting for him, you’re voting for the people who pinky promise to do so but aren’t actually required to.

    Ordinary citizens are not allowed to cast votes for a presidential candidate. Only the electors, who will face no consequences aside from party disciplinary action should they break the “gentleman’s agreement”, have this power.

    • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      Wrong. If you’re a republican elector, you face the possibility of some psycho murdering you for being a secret communist.

      The democrats will just tsk tsk you on twitter and forget who you are during the next election season.

  • BountifulEggnog [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    8 months ago

    If libs cared about voting so much, they’d pitch a much bigger fit about this shit. But they don’t, they care about the status quo.

    This is so blatantly not a system for the people. Also every chud who says “we’re a collection of states” should get the wall.

    • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      8 months ago

      I was around in 2000.

      Everybody went out and voted and then when it was time for the dems to actually stand for something and fight for the fact they literally won the election they fucked off and handed it to the Republicans.

      They’re not telling you to vote because they want you to vote they’re telling you to vote because they don’t want you to do anything else.

      • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        8 months ago

        They’re not telling you to vote because they want you to vote, they’re telling you to vote because they don’t want you to do anything else.

        well said, keeping this

      • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        They’re also too cowardly to say “vote democrat.” They’ll just say “VOTE. GO OUT AND VOTE!!” without saying for who. I’m guessing they’re trying to reign in the mythical “moderate conservative” and explicitly telling them to vote democrat will trigger their Patriotic Big Boy Resentment and they’ll vote for Trump out of spite

        • barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          This always bothered me so much when I was a lib. There are certain people who should absolutely NOT VOTE. I don’t want any fucking republicans to ever vote again, except of course for what to watch on movie night in the gulag.

    • Sephitard9001 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      "Collectivism is evil judeo bolshevism!!! Anyway we’re not people with conditions we are states with interests. Get in line, wagie!! Politics 101 smuglord "

    • Sephitard9001 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 months ago

      Democrats want me to vote for them despite them making it clear every year that they understand their own politics less than Russians across the planet.

  • crusa187@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Banish the electoral college, and implement ranked choice voting. Democracy saved.