>two party system
>democracy
will the USA ever have real democracy and freedom?
>>66016650
no, that ship sailed a long time ago
let them live in their fantasy world
>>66016650
Not until everyone in our nation can decide on one goal.
So no.
>>66016650
Better than shit we have, fucking 40 parties.
>>66016650
Its a fucking republic you ignorant twat it has literally never been and was never intended to be a democracy
>>66016650
there are actually dozens of parties in USA.
>>66017746
ten jewish parties
The Jews have made sure you will all stay divided, it's too late.
>democracy
KEK
>>66016650
>two party system
>Not a corporatocracy that gives itself kickbacks by using its blood sucking tentacles to extract as much gain out of the political process at the expense of the constituents.
>Not undercut by foreign groups that negatively impact public interests.
The United States is in serious need of an Adolf Hitler right now. Maybe with a little less jew hating, but given that this is /pol/ I know they'll take issue with that.
>>66017716
So many ignorant people just don't understand this. It's literal history and fact and yet they are oblivious.
>>66019054
I suppose people confuse "democratic values" with "Democracy"
>>66016650
We have always been a REPUBLIC Democracy. Why people fail to understand this and only say "Democracy" is beyond me.
>>66016650
Anybody can run in either of the two parties, though.
There should at least be three main parties.
>>66016650
We're being told that given enough time any multi-party system will gravitate to a set of just two parties as opposition consolidates to increase its chances.
what's the point of "parties"?
why not just individual candidates. With parties candidates get lumped together lazily.
being led by a party only 39.5% of the population wanted sure is lovely.
>>66016650
We have more than two parties, they just aren't allowed in the debates, the media and ignorant people ignore them.
Whats the difference between a republic democracy and a democracy? I feel like you guys are just spouting out bullshit now.
>>66020454
Couldnt NDP and Conservatives form a coalition and rule?
Oh no, wait, First Past the Post. Such a retarded system. Proportional representation where you need 51% of seats to form a government is much better. Whether in a coalition or no.
>>66020602
A republic is a form of democracy where the people elect representatives and leaders that are supposed to operate within the confines of a founding legal document (constitution)
There are many forms of democracy.
>>66016650
2 party system worked great for us under the Dutch Republic.
>>66016650
It doesn't matter how many parties you have as long as they're being run by the same Big Money.
>>66020602
Did you learn anything in school?
Do you even know what a direct democracy is? Do you know what Greeks are?
>>66020957
direct democracy is best right now.
>>66020957
>Do you know what Greeks are?
Homos
>>66020957
In my experience most people on /pol/ can't wrap their heads around the fact that Republic is a form of democracy and not separate from democracy. They will falsely define democracy as only direct democracy and will exclude Republic from that category even though it's blatantly false.
>>66021034
Direct Democracy is the last thing we need right now. Imagine if people knew that every single vote actually counted. They would gain the power to unite with fellow stupidity and ruin shit just because they feel like it.
It's a goddamned fact that most people believe their vote doesn't matter so they don't feel obligated. They'd rather post some tweets to give some attention but that's it. This weeds out the idiots who could sway entire elections, especially in the case of Trump. Other people may feel like they dislike both candidates and not vote at all, and others just never see the third party.
But if people knew they actually held power in their hands, even illegals would be trying to vote. Imagine Prom Queen and King but in the form of votes by individuals. Imagine popularity contests on a massive scale. The state that this country is in and parts of the world cannot allow Direct Democracy because of how radical, extreme, gullible, or ignorant people can be, and there's too much of this.
I myself have always been a supporter of Oligarchy and Dictatorships. What we need are a group of people who know what they're doing to fix things with absolutely no interruptions before we can ever start involving the common idiot in our politics as much as we do now.
>>66021701
No thanks, I need for what I say to happen.
>>66021701
So you want no control over what is done with your tax money or how much they take from you. You want no avenue of opposing any legislation imposed on you, and you are okay with having minimal to no rights.
>>66021701
You also want no control over your leaders, where they are free to do with whatever they want to do with the people.
>>66021701
I don't know if you ever unironically use the word cuck in order to insult someone who is fine with being submissive and a pushover but that fucking perfectly applies to you.
>>66016650
Never.
First Past the Post and Duverger's Law is a hell of a drug.
>>66016650
>Republic
>Democracy
will the USA ever have real democracy and freedom?
>>66022753
A Republic is a form of democracy.
>>66022910
A form of doesn't mean it's the original.
>>66016650
Do Netherlands have preferential voting or do you vote for lesser evil of those parties that you think will make it in?
Because that's how it is in Slovenia. If you vote for a party you actually like and they don't make it in, your vote is wasted - using this they can pretty much tell us whom to vote for, that's not democracy. A new party can only get in if they're REALLY REALLY good at promoting themselves.
>>66023058
Direct democracy? It's fundamentally flawed. The public isn't informed enough to make a decision on every piece of legislation. Representative democracies and republics beat that problem.
>>66023208
don't give a fuck, I want what I say to happen.
Germany has a one-party system
>>66019350
Because when we fought communism we didn't do it as a republic spreading republics across the world, we spread democracy.
>>66021947
>>66022001
Calm down. One, we do not have power over our tax money, where it goes or how much is taken from us or else it would be lowered. What we have the power to do is elect representatives who claim that they will lower taxes and allocate our tax money proper. Remember Republic Democracy, we are in no way in direct control of what happens in our government, we give a spectacularly LARGE group of people that power, which is also a problem.
I understand that there have been problem caused by dictators in the past (example our good friend Stalin who killed people out of paranoia) but just because the history we learn of them is negative, but solely because that is the attitude passed down to us. From what I have learned, they weren't trying to dehumanize people, they were trying to make their nation great. And you underestimate the power of people, dictators can get thrown off of power if the majority of people disagree with them, and that is when revolution happens. Revolutions often benefit in that they make change but also take what was good from what they demolished. How many revolutions have we had in this country in the last 2 decades? None. We are either stagnant or in decline, and barely any positive change is made. Instead we get fined for not having health insurance regardless of being perfectly healthy.
>>66016650
#1 of the people by the people for the people
which means people have a vote or a say in things
Whats really happening: a rigged voting process with everything set up against the people and nobody has a say besides Jewish owned Media manipulation and Banks
>>66023510
>>66022251
>No control over your leaders
The thing about dictatorships is that leaders don't just rise to power by just having tons of money. They NEED public support especially if the country is not primarily authoritarian or an oligarchy. A leader worthy of our trust should be placed into power, as a united country we can always take him down. It is not impossible or else we wouldn't even have a democracy.
As indoctrinated as Americans are about their "freedom" they take it for granted everyday. You don't know what freedoms you even have until it is taken from you. At least under a dictatorship we can choose who to blame instead of having a long list of previous presidents, politicians, representatives, congressman who are all fucking shit up on a massive scale with all their different ideas. Ideally, we should have a dictator who represents progress for our country. Unlike Islamic countries, we aren't going to have a group of extremists saying this isn't what god wants and are easily swayed.
Sure you must think I'm a cuck, but the idea that all authoritarian governments would be more corrupted is wrong. We have so many people running this country and corruption is so widespread that we can't even pin it on one person. So now what do we do? Absolutely nothing.
>>66023510
>>66023570
As effective as a strong authoritarian figure like FDR is, you can't control them. That is the point. They are generally, and almost always have been idiots. Again, when it's someone who knows what they're doing, it's almost the best way for government to function. But when you have someone as stupid as your average joe, couple with mental illness and megalomania, it's disaster.
You just can't have a 100% authoritarian post with out doing a dice roll to see what's going to happen.
>>66023510
>Calm down. One, we do not have power over our tax money, where it goes or how much is taken from us or else it would be lowered.
I know. We live in something very close to an oligarchy.
>And you underestimate the power of people, dictators can get thrown off of power if the majority of people disagree with them, and that is when revolutions.
That being your only option is an awful fucking idea.
>The thing about dictatorships is that leaders don't just rise to power by just having tons of money. They NEED public support
That's true of literally any form of government, but it applies the very least to what you're advocating.
>At least under a dictatorship we can choose who to blame
Yeah not a good trade off.
>Ideally, we should have a dictator who represents progress for our country.
>ideally
Yeah man there would be absolutely no way to stop him from doing whatever the fuck he wants. You seriously fail to understand how much control the people have in a republic.
>>66023570
>So now what do we do? Absolutely nothing.
We have more options and alternatives to dictatorship you submissive cuck
What is a good government that works?
>>66024288
Constitutional Republic with better safeguards against corruption.
>>66016650
>having a democracy
>with niggers
No thanks.
>>66016650
>will the USA ever have real democracy and freedom?
we are supposed to be a constitutional republic not a democracy
>>66024433
You're an idiot.
>>66024288
you'd have to say the British Parliamentary System is the best, based the general lack of corruption and sound governance of most of those states.
>>66024374
Yeah and look what republic democracy has gotten us. Trump.
>>66016650
France has a defacto two party system : socialists vs "republicans" (which is actually the exact same shit as socialists). You could say it's actually a one party system, or oligarchy. Pretty sure it's the same all over Europe.
>>66024643
>better safeguards against corruption
I'm talking about a system where we wouldn't have to settle for Trump.
>>66016650
The party system isn't as stringent as Europe's. Literally anyone left of center is a Democrat, and everyone right of center is a Republican. Candidates aren't completely tied to their party's agenda on every issue. So in a sense, it's more democratic than the European program-centered party system.
>>66017716
It's both. The federal system is republican, while the state system is democratic.
>>66016650
>Democracy
>in a Republic
>>66023776
I see what you're saying, but "someone as stupid as your average joe" doesn't get recognized and won't have the ability to rise to such great levels of power. They would need public trust, and being stupid doesn't just lead to public trust or else Feminism would have been more of a problem than it is now.
I have also said Oligarchy, it may be close, but condensing power and making a smaller group of people have it can lessen corruption to amounts that we can predict.
I honestly would rather take a dice roll than watch this country unfold into the bread and circus it already is.
>>66024021
>>66024247
We are not close to an Oligarchy with the vast amount of people that go in and out of our government. Like I said, people don't like knowing that there is one person in power, so they prefer many in hopes that they might get a taste. But have you seen the way people are behaving these days? Like animals. Not even the altruistic type of animals, they turn against each other. We have people advocating one race over another in a country that is supposed to be united as Americans over their own race and people who slander our country they seek solace from.
At the end of the day you give the common man power and he squanders it or abuses it. If anybody has the balls to risk turning an entire country of people against them to make positive changes is worthy of the title. Nobody can walk up wanting to live like a Monarch and grab power, you need to be highly experienced, well rounded, and be well above common folk to bend a nation to your will.
And lastly authoritarian government does not automatically make us communists.
>>66016650
when the country is full of retards you don't want real democracy
>>66024959
>2 parties is more democratic than 12 parties
ok dude kek.
>>66025100
ok ive never read anything more stupid than this
>>66016650
>democracy
>freedom
Pick one.
>>66025127
>We are not close to an Oligarchy with the vast amount of people that go in and out of our government.
It is not a working Republic, only the elite 1% have a real significant say in what happens.
All your complaints are more about what you're advocating than what I'm advocating.
>>66024643
Trump, even if the worst dreams of the liberals came true, would be subject to substantial constitutional safeguards such as impeachment, Supreme Court rulings, and the power of the purse.
here a three videos that are an extremely easy way to understand whats wrong with the US voting system. these are just gateways and you can research deeper but these would be sufficient as an understanding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUS9mM8Xbbw
https://archive.org/stream/LiberalismOrDemocracyCarlSchmittAndApoliticalDemocracy/LiberalismOrDemocracy_djvu.txt
"the rites of liberal
democracy are an elegant smoke screen for the absence of self-government"
>>66025518
I'm advocating an authoritarian government.
And this "1%" elite composed of hundreds of thousands of people is not less corrupt when it is 1% taking sides, arguing, profiting themselves.
Why defend keeping that "1%" why not get rid of them? If you want to make it as minuscule as 1%, then all we need is one.
And remember, it is these mass of people who squabble with each other and prevent positive change.
>>66016650
Now that Schillary has cucked Bernie, it's now time to vote Green Party this year -- and never look back, even if that means Tronald Dump gets elected. Don't look back, people, just don't look back. The Democratic Party does not stand up for you, so why in the Hell are you going to keep cucking for it? Fuck this two-party system! The only way to break it is to elevate the Greens.
two party system is going to crash America soon.
The inefficiency is showing, the inevitable will come, the fall of America will cause a global war, so massive, you will kill to your hearts content or die.
>>66016650
>democracy
They don't need democracy. They need Trump
also
>sweden
>democracy
worked very well as you can se
>>66017130
Big talk from the muslim
