Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Fuzzly Bear** · 06-25-2010, 05:49 PM

You compared national socialism with socialism. I doubt national socialism would have been keen on greater rights for groups such as blacks and women.

(06-25-2010 04:58 PM)kcoll Wrote: what i said was women getting the vote definitly had a positive effect on womans rights
as they make up more than half the voting population
this is testiment to the voting system

Would you care to expand upon this statement?

Yea the voting system is fucking great isn't it. That's why, for example, the Liberal Democrats received an increased share of the votes yet lost seats! What a great system we have! There's no way to improve it at all!

There are/has been a great number of socialists in these islands. A great number were killed back in the day by the British. Today many don't vote for socialist parties because they can't or because there is no point voting for them as they will obviously lose, due to the fact that the current system is so outdated and skewed. Oh and also because they don't know about socialism. That could be something to do with decades of propaganda. It could also have something to do with the way that the system doesn't actually allow for socialism.

**kcoll** · 06-25-2010, 06:08 PM

The libdems got fewer votes this election than they did the last one

**Fuzzly Bear** · 06-25-2010, 06:58 PM

Wrong. They lost five seats, gained 1% of the vote over the last election (23%) and won 8.8% of the seats with 6,836,824 votes. You could compare that with Labour, who with 8,609,527 (29%) votes have 39.7% of the seats, or the Conservatives, who received 10,703,754 votes (36.1%) and 46.1% of the seats.

**kcoll** · (This post was last modified: 06-29-2010 01:52 AM by kcoll.)

(06-25-2010 05:49 PM)HamishFTW Wrote: You compared national socialism with socialism. I doubt national socialism would have been keen on greater rights for groups such as blacks and women.

(06-25-2010 04:58 PM)kcoll Wrote: what i said was women getting the vote definitly had a positive effect on womans rights
as they make up more than half the voting population
this is testiment to the voting system

Would you care to expand upon this statement?

Yea the voting system is fucking great isn't it. That's why, for example, the Liberal Democrats received an increased share of the votes yet lost seats! What a great system we have! There's no way to improve it at all!

There are/has been a great number of socialists in these islands. A great number were killed back in the day by the British. Today many don't vote for socialist parties because they can't or because there is no point voting for them as they will obviously lose, due to the fact that the current system is so outdated and skewed. Oh and also because they don't know about socialism. That could be something to do with decades of propaganda. It could also have something to do with the way that the system doesn't actually allow for socialism.

so their not stupid any more?i agree that most people do not care about politics if they have enough their mostly indifferent. when people are effected more by political decisions it will cause more people to vote. i have already said this is a problem with the voting system that their is not a high enough turnout at elections.
why do you keep asking me to expand on women getting the vote?do you not understand that this improved womans rights?
and what anti socialist propaganda are you talking about i have yet to see any on mainstream news and i can remember the ussr.unless your referring to most democratic countrys telling Russia to tare down the Berlin wall.
and in what way does the system not allow for socialism? you mean that the majority of the people do not want it? i am all for socialism if it comes around by democratic process. like shakur said any other way is Fascism.
revolution has rarely worked out good. in almost all cases the revolutionary become the elite.
and i specifically made a distinction between national socialism and socialism.

**Dumbat** · 06-27-2010, 12:02 AM

Voting just provides a brilliant catch 22 for when the 'elected representatives' mess up:

If you don't vote: - "Well maybe you should vote next time"

If you do vote - "Well you voted for them/ They were democratically elected"

It just helps ensure they aren't held responsible for their actions.

There is also the problems of governments manipulating constituancies and unfair voting systems mean that the majority of peoples votes don't actually count (can't remember the name of the study, but I read that as few as 10,000 people actually have a say when you eliminate all the safe seats etc...)

This is before you even get onto the fact that almost all are either corrupt or blind to the facts - who could you have voted for to avoid the Iraq War, Digital Economies Bill or to bring about actual economic change, etc...

Conclusion - Democracy requires 2 things:
1.) That the people voting know about what they are voting for
2.) The elected representatives represent the people who voted for them - not themselves, their party or any 3rd party interest

Neither of these conditions are satisfied and so your vote is worthless.

**shakur420** · 06-27-2010, 10:43 AM

I agree and disagree with some of what you said, Dumbat.

(06-27-2010 12:02 AM)Dumbat Wrote: Voting just provides a brilliant catch 22 for when the 'elected representatives' mess up...

It just helps ensure they aren't held responsible for their actions.

(06-27-2010 12:02 AM)Dumbat Wrote: There is also the problems of governments manipulating constituancies and unfair voting systems mean that the majority of peoples votes don't actually count...

(06-27-2010 12:02 AM)Dumbat Wrote: This is before you even get onto the fact that almost all are either corrupt or blind to the facts - who could you have voted for to avoid the Iraq War, Digital Economies Bill or to bring about actual economic change, etc...

I agree completely.

(06-27-2010 12:02 AM)Dumbat Wrote: Democracy requires 2 things:
1.) That the people voting know about what they are voting for
2.) The elected representatives represent the people who voted for them - not themselves, their party or any 3rd party interest

Thought I do agree with the #1, #2 is not a part of Democracy. It is a trait of Representative Democracies/Republics (like most governments claiming to be Democracies). There is a fundamental difference in Democracy - there are no representatives. We represent ourselves. There is no such thing as a "type of Democracy" or a "form of Democracy", in my opinion. Just like freedom. We can't be free if there are some "necessary restrictions to ensure freedom". It's hypocrisy, propaganda and a straight out lie. It's either one or the other. It's either Democracy (rule by the the people) or it's something else.

A Representative Democracy/Republic is not a Democracy by any means, because it changes the fundamental way in which we govern. Either we decide for ourselves (Democracy), or we choose people to decide for us (Republic). It's not even close to the same thing. I think you displayed that with your mention that we don't not have the ability to choose whether we go to war, how to fix our economies or treat people's art. Even the most perfectly functioning Republic (with no corruption) would not be a democracy as the votes would come from our "representatives" - not us. To think that our representatives, even in a perfect world without corruption, would know how we would like them to vote on everything is ridiculous. And so, it's not Democracy.

The system (Representative Democracy) is flawed to begin with because it is unrepresentative of the people by nature. It is representative of the wishes of our representatives, and so removing corruption does nothing. Add in the fact that they constantly call themselves "Democracies" and you have the best form of sustainable Fascism. Where people think they have a say while they are ultimately and completely dictated to.

(06-27-2010 12:02 AM)Dumbat Wrote:
If you don't vote: - "Well maybe you should vote next time"

If you do vote - "Well you voted for them/ They were democratically elected"

p.s. The arguments I always hear are this.

If you didn't vote - "you can't complain."

lol, there's a reason I didn't vote, you dumbass, is how I usually respond.

If you do vote - "then don't be a sore loser, cause that's Democracy."

No, Democracy means all people who participate are equally represented. The minority is not supposed to be automatically vetoed every time the majority wants something. This is displayed by the way parties vote - the same way. In political parties you are not allowed to vote against the position of your party, you must vote the same way to ensure that the ruling party (majority) always wins the vote. It may not be a "written" rule, but there's been too many instances of MPs/Congressmen being fired or forced to resign because they voted, or intended to vote, outside party lines.

It's because of this, that I feel inclined to believe that it's useless to vote today. As long as we have Representative Democracies/Republics, corruption or not, your vote doesn't matter - because you don't have one. Only your MP/Congressman has the ability to vote.

**Dumbat** · 06-29-2010, 12:28 AM

Quote:The system (Representative Democracy) is flawed to begin with because it is unrepresentative of the people by nature. It is representative of the wishes of our representatives, and so removing corruption does nothing. Add in the fact that they constantly call themselves "Democracies" and you have the best form of sustainable Fascism. Where people think they have a say while they are ultimately and completely dictated to.

Too true man, I think Representative Democracy is a political dead-end - useful when quick decisions are needed ( e.g. in a time of total war) but too easily manipulated to be used for any lengthy time scale as it is now.

But people nowadays are too impatient and lazy for true democracy - if you made them vote once a week for which laws they wanted to pass then it wouldn't take more than a year for low turnout to make it pointless. Not to mention that each new law would take year or decades to create and enforce.

Politics always makes me defeatist, I know of no system which doesn't have massive flaws - so big as to make change almost futile. Any suggestions or book advise?

**Boboulas** · (This post was last modified: 06-29-2010 01:28 AM by Boboulas.)

Boy oh boy im gonna call some people out.

Quote:I also love how all these
socialist talk of revolution and forcing
their views on ppl a real nazi idelology

Unless you forgot from the last thread, you are herby forbidden to talk about socialism or anything even remotely pertaining to the left. You know nothing about it.

Quote:allthough our system ant perfect it the best we got

You must have really low standards then

Quote:What is 'human nature' Shak?

While its a good question we shouldnt bring it up here, shame shakur responded. It would suit a new thread better.

Quote:People in the US and the UK wouldn't support socialism because they are stupid as fuck (/just lied to)

Nah they are just stupid as fuck. What in your life have you done any differently than what anyone else could have done to come to the same conclusion? The reason lies work so well is because people are so damn stupid.

Quote:If it's forced, it's not democracy, it's fascism.

Could you expand upon the context you are saying this with?

Quote:this is testiment to the voting system

NO. Its testiment to suffrage and the suffragette activism. This is most likely a topic you know very little about and belive that it was somehow magicly granted by voting.

Quote:Also to say that ppl do not vote socialist because they are stupid is beyond me

If you dont understand what something is (like you) and you claim it is something it is not, thats ignorance (lack of knowledgeon a certain subject or even the world as a whole, again like you). People cant see that their time and energy is better spent trying to take control, so why cant they see this? Because they arent smart enough to figure out that the lie they are given isnt true. Thats why people are kept deaf, dumb and blind of the world.

Quote:the small number of socialist partys is proof of this

There is a whole history of capitalist states ruthlessly destroying the left, because it was popular and had strong support.

Quote:when people are effected more by political decisions it will cause more people to vote.

People vote because they think they have a stake in the outcome, they get something sure, but they are fed ideas and proposals that are usualy warped or scrapped alltogether.

Quote:and i specifically made a distinction between national socialism and socialism.

1 of those you know very little about and i question your knowledge on the other.

Now that thats out of the way, back to the thread.

Voting matters in some cases, but it depends entirely on the ellection system. Most democracies are run by unfair systems so as to make sure the minority dont get a say.

Face-to-face direct democracy is the best way after the revoultion.

Quote:Any suggestions?

The entire capitalist system has become corrupt to the core. Revoultion hopes to bring about radical change to improve the lives of the masses and to overthrow the class that want to control us. We are not pawns on their chess game of power, you can refuse to play within this hopeless system by advocating the greatest of radical changes, revoultion.

People will tell you to vote and get the guy you want in power, but he doesnt represent your interests and the system is designed so that future candidates never will either. Remove the capitalist government and put power back into the hands of the people.

**Boboulas** · 07-01-2010, 12:14 AM

The more and more people see how hopeless the current system is, the more social revoultion seems becomes the answer.

**Dumbat** · (This post was last modified: 07-01-2010 12:29 AM by Dumbat.)

(06-29-2010 01:20 AM)Boboulas Wrote: The entire capitalist system has become corrupt to the core. Revoultion hopes to bring about radical change to improve the lives of the masses and to overthrow the class that want to control us. We are not pawns on their chess game of power, you can refuse to play within this hopeless system by advocating the greatest of radical changes, revoultion.

People will tell you to vote and get the guy you want in power, but he doesnt represent your interests and the system is designed so that future candidates never will either. Remove the capitalist government and put power back into the hands of the people.

I agree that the system is beyond repair, but I can't help think that revolution would be catastrophic for any western country.

The economy is designed so that an economic attack can destroy any globalised currency in a single day - so any successful revolutionary government would find itself penniless.

A blockade of Britain would also be pretty devistating - think of how much of our food we actually grow ourselves.

Not to mention that the people of this country probably wouldn't revolt if their lives depended on it - the fact that they cared more about the expenses scandle than the Iraq war or G20 protests should tell you something - the majority don't care who dies as long as they keep their money.

And those are just the first few.

While most problems can be overcome, you really think 'the masses' will follow you as you do. I don't think modern Westerners have the courage or stamina to hold out and stand up for what they believe in.

**Boboulas** · 07-01-2010, 12:53 AM

Quote:I agree that the system is beyond repair, but I can't help think that revolution would be catastrophic for any western country.

The economy is designed so that an economic attack can destroy any globalised currency in a single day - so any successful revolutionary government would find itself penniless.

A blockade of Britain would also be pretty devistating - think of how much of our food we actually grow ourselves.

All very viable points. The revoultion must spread otherwise fail. Socialism in 1 country hasnt had a very sucsessful history. But look at it like this. Arround the time of the bolshevik revoultion capitalist states were giving way on so many issues to the working class to pacify them. In this day and age imagine what workers would do upon hearing that USA, france, UK, germany, spain, russia, poland, china, india, turkey, egypt, australia, canada, brazil had a revoultion socialist in nature?

Pick anyone of them and you will see the surrounding area explode with revoultionary struggles.

Quote:Not to mention that the people of this country probably wouldn't revolt if their lives depended on it - the fact that they cared more about the expenses scandle than the Iraq war or G20 protests should tell you something - the majority don't care who dies as long as they keep their money.

This is because they are molded into this way of thinking, this is how destructuve capitalism has become. People arent "naturaly" inclined to not care, it has been the process of decades of control of society by the capitalist.

Quote:While most problems can be overcome, you really think 'the masses' will follow you as you do.

I have no doubt that once people are shown the truth and the facts that they will want what is rightfully theirs.

Quote:I don't think modern Westerners have the courage or stamina to hold out and stand up for what they believe in.

My friend, go back in time about 100/80 years and you will see a world full of revoultionary debate. Socialists actualy had power in western europe during this time. Since then the workers have been defeated. It wont take much to ignite it again, it just needs to be planned meticulously and executed flawlessly.

Never give up on anyone, ever.

**kcoll** · (This post was last modified: 07-03-2010 04:10 PM by kcoll.)

(06-29-2010 01:20 AM)Boboulas Wrote: Nah they are just stupid as fuck. What in your life have you done any differently than what anyone else could have done to come to the same conclusion? The reason lies work so well is because people are so damn stupid.

NO. Its testiment to suffrage and the suffragette activism. This is most likely a topic you know very little about and belive that it was somehow magicly granted by voting.

once again because some one dont agree with you do not mean they are ignorant or dumb. you really saying that the doctors, lawyers, scientists/ what ever of this country are dumb and any one that agree with you is not?

and the suffragette did little for womans rights, if you know your history they were sighted as a reason not to give women the vote.one killed herself in protest by throwing her self infrount of the kings horse at a race, the public reaction was a crazy woman injured the kings horse- dont let them vote their unstable.
women got voting rights after their service in ww2. once woman got the vote their rights drasticaly improved ,simply because they make up more than half of the voting population.