Why is liberty so overrated? Isn't it better to live in a dictatorship/kingdom than in a hypocrite "democracy"?
I like doing shit desu senpai
It really depends on what role your playing in that situation, if you are a person, villien, serf, or slave in that political society you might not be to happy or find time to learn how to wind surf because your working 15 hours a day. The king or dictator in that same political society or corporation has a compete opposite point of view, he's got all the time he wants to become expert wind surfer and hang out getting drunk and eating chicken wings. What is his only obligation really? Whatever he decides. I believe your asking this because you never actually been free, truly free, historically speaking, men who are the subjects to another or even a sovereign state like Rome can never find happiness or security. It was a society of slaves where all men are equal under a single sovereign power, to eachother they appear to be free but actually they're not because they are equally subjects under the sovereign power in a political slave society.
Depends on where you are in that hierarchy
>>456547
Dictatorship is more honest than modern democracy - the collaboration between the rich people and the state is more visible than in modern liberal democracies.
>>456547
Sure, you can have fun being ruled by bureaucrats I guess. You'll probably regret being such an edgelord when the Gestapo come knocking on your door though.
>>456547
literally the only reason people say this is because they've been spoiled by democracy.
no your life won't be better because some aristocrat can shit all over you, fucking retard.
Literally because of propaganda.
>>456547
Problem with democracy we are trying to create larger representations of people (united states, European union, UN) rather than downsizing. If countries were size of 1 million, your vote would count for much more and you'd feel more satisfied about democracy. Your vote among 300 million feels just useless. So balkanize world!
"if democroacy gave power to the people, it would be abolished"
>>456547
Only the privileged few could really enjoy life at the same degree that we enjoy right now in dictatorship/kingdom.
Democracy and liberty are literally polar opposites. If you think the monarchies of old were some kinda tyrannical shitholes, think again.
>>456739
[citation needed]
>>456744
Fuck off republican shill. Just compare the civil and economic liberties in Austria-Hungary with those of her successors, everything from gun rights to taxation.
>>456722
Not all citizens vote, only about 1/3 are registered voters, then reduce that by the citizens who actually show up, then the idea the citizens only get about 4 electoral votes out of 400. So really what's the point, revoke citizenship and become American National don't vote and govern yourself with love, compassion, and truth.
>>456600
>What is his only obligation really? Whatever he decides.
An autocratic ruler, if he fucks up, risks being ousted by a palace coup, murdered in his sleep, hanged, decapitated, exiled, gelded, blinded, etc. etc.
A democratic ruler risks not getting elected again and the size of his pension when he retires.
So an autocratic ruler has a lot stronger obligation to be good.
On the second hand, in a democracy, the checks and balances system means it's much harder to fuck up royally.
On the third hand, in a democracy, the checks and balances system also means it's much harder to achieve full success, because you have people opposing your every step.
>>456547
Democracy should not imply liberty. Democracy becomes a circlejerk, but it usually stays pretty meh most of the time, good enough. Dictatorship is hit and miss, and kingdom or aristocratic systems suck ass.
Liberal capitalist democracies almost universally have better living standards than other countries. Only fat Ignatiuses insulated from the real world and having circlejerks with stormfags and neoreactionaries on the internet are dumb enough to believe this shit.
>>456754
>everything from gun rights to taxation
Ah, the only two measures of liberty that burgerlard aspergertarians have.
>>457054
/thread
>>456547
Let me guess OP you were watching LotGH?
>>456547
The American founders basically didn't trust most of the country with voting. And calling America a "Democracy" has always been entertaining. The original constitution was basically set to keep power in the educated landholding gentry, and even then there's plenty in the early formation of "keep the people educated but don't let them get too powerful."
The American System was built to prevent (and it still does in some regards, but lacked the foresight of what modern infotainment has done) the idiocy of the mob from gaining hold.
Even then, a democracy provides the capacity for change without violence and some vetting capacity for leaders. Dictatorships and Kingships inevitably lead to vacuums of power or influence.
>>456785
>So an autocratic ruler has a lot stronger obligation to be good.
Read The Prince nigger. This is why autocrats have armies.
>>456547
Dictatorship is good but only when I'm in charge :DDD
t. Blado
>>457208
>"keep the people educated but don't let them get too powerful."
How did that fuck up so badly in both goals?
>>457250
Educated doesn't necessarily mean understanding, just access to it so those interested in the process can.
Also groups of citizens can have more influence than it may appear, the NRA for example is first and foremost made up of private citizens.
The problem is that the people who have both the time and the resources to participate in Democracy has dwindled as they work longer for the same amount of pay. Essentially, only the top 40% has any regular say at all in the democratic process.
>>456770
>then the idea the citizens only get about 4 electoral votes out of 400
Was nice until that part, american system is soso.
Still, only a small fraction of votes are effectively represented in many governments. In Germany, onl about 50% vote, then a few percent just vanish due to the 5% quota a party has to meet to be in the parliament. Opposition has basically no power. Actually only the CDU has some and are governing wiht 40% of the votes. Which is probably less than a fifth of the actual population.
>>457060
As opposed to europeans, who only use immigration?
>OP
>>456600
I mean, can we actually be free? Really free? That's my point.
>>456723
Source? I'm interested.
>>458592
>I mean, can we actually be free? Really free?
I doubt this simply because we've evolved to be socially structured. The best way we know of to establish a social structure is to establish a pecking order. All humans, even toddlers, will instinctively strive towards a pecking order. If we were tigers, we could be truly free, anon. But we are not tigers.
>>458642
Exactly. I hate mankind, they sell and push the whole idea of liberty that ends up hurting you.
>>457060
I'm European you dipshit. Those are pretty important liberties.
>>458663
I don't think it's purposefully deceptive. Despite our tendency to establish social hierarchy, we still have our ideals. Democracy is more of a concept that we strive toward than something we properly practice. Personally, I think it's overrated myself. The suffering of the human condition is not allayed by political systems, but rather order, peace, and prosperity.
>>458682
But, can't social hierarchy be the ideal? Indeed democracy is overrated. Political systems are all about order and prosperity in their own measure though...
>>456785
>An autocratic ruler, if he fucks up, risks being ousted by a palace coup, murdered in his sleep, hanged, decapitated, exiled, gelded, blinded, etc. etc.
Not if he has foreign support, a military that they keep happy or a fear factor that prevents rebellion.
>>458700
>But, can't social hierarchy be the ideal?
Certainly, but for many people it seems that the ideal they seek is something they've never known. Hierarchy is the norm, so people might not wish to seek it. Rather, they seek something along the lines of an anarchic paradise that somehow manages to not be crippled by murder and theft. To me, this is all according to the Western mindset. East Asians, for example, probably see the above as a horror rather than a paradise. Confucianism fully embraces the idea of a rigidly structured social environment. As for your last point, it's true that all political systems are about order and prosperity, but some appear to place the system itself above the values of order and prosperity. Think about the United States "making the world safe for democracy" during the Cold War.
>>458727
Every year East Asia is more and more corrupted by Western ideals, which leads me to ask once more: Isn't an authoritary regime better?
>>458750
>Every year East Asia is more and more corrupted by Western ideals
Well now, that depends. Western society might be nearing its twilight years. Recently. China has turned Western technological advances to satisfy its Confucian outlook with this.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-34592186
>>456547
Would you enjoy dying in a famine? If the answer is yes, dictatorships are the way to go.
>>458773
Stunning and scary
>>458809
Embarassing desu senpai
>>456547
DESU Liberty is pretty good if you roll a good Civ for it (Like China, or Greece). Tradition is def better most of the time, though.
>>458773
>social credit
Will create a static and sterile society wherein the average rules, and will at best be a hugh failure, and at worst damage society
>>458892
>Implying it's not static already.
>>458910
I know, the static nature of Chinese society is probably the main cause of why they came up with this dumb shit in the first place. This will merely speed up the rot within China.
I can only hope that no bureacratic retard in the west copies this shit
>>456547
Judging by the stories daddy told me of growing up in Soviet Poland, no.
Any government based on the principle of 1 person imposing their will on others is going to be fucked up. Maybe there are ways to escape it without resorting to democracy. King Richard was popular because he spent most of his time away crusading and in France, so maybe a bureaucracy set up with the goal of maintaining political stability is better than some despot ruling by decree and trying to squeeze as much out of his subjects as possible. Constitutional monarchy maybe.
>>457060
Well taxation is basically everything as its what counts for the majority of government money
>>458929
Why are you so mad at China?
>>458592
no through you faith in your rationality; only empiricism brings knowledge which becomes liberty, morality and happiness.
>>458876
>I've never read Amartya Den
Step it up, senpai
I dunno, have you ever lived in a dictatorship? Why don't you try to move to one if you think it would be so great?
>>458592
Why are you asking questions, the context of which, you don't understand? What does being truly free have to do with what you want out of life? What job you have? What clothing you wear? How you decide to kill yourself? What stupid questions you decide to post on the internet? Where and how are you limited, without playing the role of the victim.
>>457360
>The problem is that the people who have both the time and the resources to participate in Democracy has dwindled as they work longer for the same amount of pay. Essentially, only the top 40% has any regular say at all in the democratic process.
Considering the fact that absentee ballots exist and that the unemployed have a shitton of free time, I'd attribute the low participation rate to apathy more than economic pressure.
But in the 21st century capitalist model, voting with your wallet it probably more effective anyway.
>>458773
t. posted by someone who has no clue about how capitalistic and jewish the average ching chong is
A nation for psychopaths by psychopaths.
>>456713
What's the difference between being shit on by an aristocrat and an oligarch?
>>458665
Id take freedom of expression, religion and association first t b h fåm
>>456547
OP listen
If you give people the thought that they have "liberty" its easy to stay in power
If you tell them the bitter truth they can't handle it and start revolutions
