|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On December 03 2018 21:02 ReditusSum wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2018 20:57 iamthedave wrote:On December 03 2018 20:55 ReditusSum wrote:On December 03 2018 02:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2018 02:08 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2018 00:51 Gorsameth wrote:On December 03 2018 00:42 Silvanel wrote:On December 02 2018 22:51 georgehabadasher wrote:
The article said California has 19 million registered voters, not 19 million eligible voters. Can non registered vote? No. The US uses an system here eligible voters have to register that they want to vote before actually being allowed to do so. If you didn't register in time you can't vote on election day. Its an antiquated system that one party has no interest in replacing because it would hurt their ability to suppress certain demographics from voting. A quick google gives me 25 mil eligible voters in California and 19mil registered. Donno how that compares to the rest of the US. As a foreigner living in Spain, I have to explicitly register to vote in the municipal elections. Simply being registered as living there is insufficient. It's not a hard process (they sent me a letter with a code on it that I could use on the website to register for voting), but it is something you have to do. I don't think it's so farfetched to require people to show some interest in the democratic process before election day? Assuming the process is simple and accessible for everybody. But why require it? What is gained by requiring someone to sign up? Status quo should be that someone does vote. Voting is, imo, a duty, not just a right. Choosing not to participate is unethical and I think it is good for government to encourage participation. Having less than 90% turnout is a failure. The fact that the entire planet has issues with voting participation shouldn't make us lose track of what the ideal scenario is. We have a lot of cultural work to do and I think automatic registration helps with participation frrlibg more implied than optional. I should not have to vote if I don't want to vote. I do not support democracy as a governing system so forcing me to engage in the system is an abuse of power. Interesting. What's your preference to Democracy? I'm not sure yet. I'd need to do more research. I'm leaning toward theocratic-monarchy with some democratic elements as regards to local councils and what-not; maybe some kind of National Senate appointed by the State Governors (who would be more like Dukes; a hereditary position of basically absolute authority within the State) that has some kind of advisory, possibly more important function.
Which religion? Christianity? Islam? Greek mythology? (I wouldn't consider the philosophy of secular humanism to be theocratic imo.)
|
It's pretty obvious is it not? The God-Emperor of Trump. Of course if we go by Christianity, it'll not be Catholicism, as that will be subservient to the Vatican, though he can be of the Othodox tradition, but he is unlikely to accept the "first among equals" concept, so it'll be the Protestant model. Then again if he goes by the Islamic model, it'll be pretty hard for him to claim descent or share power to a theocratic council so both Sunni and Shia is out of the question. Appropriating a pagan belief system is probably the best bet. You can mix it up with some circled lightling,odals, sig-runes, celtic crosses, triskelions, wolfangels!
Perhaps just dispense with the church part and just rule by divine right! Now that's truly a strong monarch, to dispense with the power struggles of the theocratic elements! Do a Henry VIII and confiscate church lands and keep the power structures for yourself. Off with her head! Melenia keeps glancing at Trudeu anyways.
Or perhaps the Judeo tradition. Of 3000 years ago of the God-Kings of Jerusalem.
Or the God-King Pharoahs of Egypt!
Or the God-King of Persia!
Or the God-Emperor of ancient Chinese dynasties!
There's been a million god-kings, a million theocratic-monarchies of a million faiths throughout history. Just discussing the possibilities excite me!
|
On December 03 2018 21:51 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It's pretty obvious is it not? The God-Emperor of Trump. Of course if we go by Christianity, it'll not be Catholicism, as that will be subservient to the Vatican, though he can be of the orthodox tradition, but he is unlikely to accept the "first among equals" concept, so it'll be the protestant model. Then again if he goes by the islamic model, it'll be pretty hard for him to claim descent or share power to a theocratic council so both sunni and shia is out of the question. Mimicing a pagan belief system is probably the best bet.
Perhaps just dispense with the church part and just rule by divine right! Now that's truly a strong monarch, to dispense with the power struggles of the theocratic elements! Do a Henry VIII and confiscate church lands and keep the power structures for yourself. Off with her head! Melenia keeps glancing at Trudeu anyways.
Or perhaps the Judeo tradition. Of 3000 years ago of the God-Kings of Jerusalem.
Or the God-King Pharoahs of Egypt!
Or the God-King of Persia!
Or the God-Emperor of ancient Chinese dynasties!
There's been a million god-kings, a million theocratic-monarchies of a million faiths throughout history. Just discussing the possibilities excite me!
I would personally favour the Triple Alliance style. It also aligns well with the US state system. Paying tribute to a central power that has the most military and the religious mandate.
Ancestral worship would fit in well with US mentality. Though few of those allow for an all-powerful ruler.
|
Ancestral worship is hard to combine with a theocratic monarchy. To venerate your ancestors yet venerate a hereditary ruler and divine theocracy is three venerations that can cause cognitive dissonance, though the Catholic church did it's best to combine pagan rituals with itself by adopting the doctrine of the Holy Trinity sometime around the 4th century. Best way to combine it is to simply form the belief system where the Emperor or god-king is descended from god, or the incarnation of God, or a god that is a human. Imperial cults are a great idea. We can all learn a lot of the Ancient Egyptians. They built the greatest, the absolute biggest towers. And so they were the tallest for 3000 years. Marvellous.
|
|
|
On December 02 2018 07:53 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2018 06:25 Sermokala wrote:On December 02 2018 04:25 Excludos wrote:On December 02 2018 04:22 Sermokala wrote:
We should ignore topics that people care about to avoid them getting actioned for it. Real hot take there. What could his death possibly bring to the conversation other than either "rip" or "He was a shit president!"? It's best to just let it lay People might not speak ill of the recently deceased former leader of the country? I mean should we have a policy of ignoring when people die beacuse people can't be expected to have basic manners and decency? I mean, what does it even have to do with politics really? He hasn't been President for decades. Unless you're going to somehow tie his policy decisions into what is happening today, what does posting "RIP" or "he sucked" accomplish? I'm basically just re-wording what was already said. I just don't think it's a topic that belongs in this thread because it won't have any content.
It's weird to think that a modern president's (or modern CIA director's) actions wouldn't have continuing effects on today (positive or negative).
|
On November 30 2018 03:07 ShoCkeyy wrote:
And this is Trump we're talking about here. One minute WH says one thing, he does the other.
Called it, he met with Putin anyways in G20 a few sources are saying.
|
Trump, having plead for 'rebuilding the military' for 716 billion dollars, and proudly presenting it as his great accomplishment + Show Spoiler +, finds out the military spending this year is whopping 716 billion dollars. An uncontrollable arms race!
I mean I'd like a stop to the arms race too, and you guys could sure use 700 billion on other things, but nothing about this combination of statements makes sense. Then again I should stop trying to find sense probably.
|
On December 03 2018 21:02 ReditusSum wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2018 20:57 iamthedave wrote:On December 03 2018 20:55 ReditusSum wrote:On December 03 2018 02:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2018 02:08 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2018 00:51 Gorsameth wrote:On December 03 2018 00:42 Silvanel wrote:On December 02 2018 22:51 georgehabadasher wrote:
The article said California has 19 million registered voters, not 19 million eligible voters. Can non registered vote? No. The US uses an system here eligible voters have to register that they want to vote before actually being allowed to do so. If you didn't register in time you can't vote on election day. Its an antiquated system that one party has no interest in replacing because it would hurt their ability to suppress certain demographics from voting. A quick google gives me 25 mil eligible voters in California and 19mil registered. Donno how that compares to the rest of the US. As a foreigner living in Spain, I have to explicitly register to vote in the municipal elections. Simply being registered as living there is insufficient. It's not a hard process (they sent me a letter with a code on it that I could use on the website to register for voting), but it is something you have to do. I don't think it's so farfetched to require people to show some interest in the democratic process before election day? Assuming the process is simple and accessible for everybody. But why require it? What is gained by requiring someone to sign up? Status quo should be that someone does vote. Voting is, imo, a duty, not just a right. Choosing not to participate is unethical and I think it is good for government to encourage participation. Having less than 90% turnout is a failure. The fact that the entire planet has issues with voting participation shouldn't make us lose track of what the ideal scenario is. We have a lot of cultural work to do and I think automatic registration helps with participation frrlibg more implied than optional. I should not have to vote if I don't want to vote. I do not support democracy as a governing system so forcing me to engage in the system is an abuse of power. Interesting. What's your preference to Democracy? I'm not sure yet. I'd need to do more research. I'm leaning toward theocratic-monarchy with some democratic elements as regards to local councils and what-not; maybe some kind of National Senate appointed by the State Governors (who would be more like Dukes; a hereditary position of basically absolute authority within the State) that has some kind of advisory, possibly more important function.
That awkward moment you realize some people would actually welcome The Handmaid’s Tale’s world.
Theocracy-monarchy... Two centuries and a half of enlightenment, human rights, and democracy to get to the point where kids born in america want to go back to the dark age because obscurantism sounds cool.
|
I think at that point one should just give them a one-way ticket to saudi arabia and see how happy they will actually be in that society they dream of.
|
Not to mention the fantastical imagined role of what he thinks the title of Duke is.
_____
On December 03 2018 23:40 JimmiC wrote:
Everyone who envisions these always sees themselves as part of the favored class. So it would be whatever religion or thing he believes and obviously he would have some important position of power where he could take advantage of the inevitable corruption of any totalitarian regime. No matter how they start (left, right, god fearing, god hating) they all end up the same.
It's worse than that, he would imagine himself to be part of a hereditary group. See when I imagined the the best form of government when I was something like 13, I went the whole hog and put down steps to place myself of a permanent position of power as the immortal God-emperor of all of Mankind and take advantage of the inevitable corruption.
Step 1 was obtain god like powers. Step 2 was obtain immortality. Step 3 was to construct a religious cult where I am the head of the church. I can't remember the rest of the steps, but it was something to combat the rest of power structures of the world and construct an existential enemy that would unite mankind in the veneration of myself. I never got past step 1.
|
On December 04 2018 01:04 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Trump, having plead for 'rebuilding the military' for 716 billion dollars, and proudly presenting it as his great accomplishment + Show Spoiler +, finds out the military spending this year is whopping 716 billion dollars. An uncontrollable arms race! https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1069584730880974849I mean I'd like a stop to the arms race too, and you guys could sure use 700 billion on other things, but nothing about this combination of statements makes sense. Then again I should stop trying to find sense probably.
Trump's entire gameplan is getting praise for his terrific job of kind of restoring things back to what they were before crises he created.
|
On December 04 2018 01:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Not to mention the fantastical imagined role of what he thinks the title of Duke is. _____ Show nested quote +On December 03 2018 23:40 JimmiC wrote:
Everyone who envisions these always sees themselves as part of the favored class. So it would be whatever religion or thing he believes and obviously he would have some important position of power where he could take advantage of the inevitable corruption of any totalitarian regime. No matter how they start (left, right, god fearing, god hating) they all end up the same. It's worse than that, he would imagine himself to be part of a hereditary group. See when I imagined the the best form of government when I was something like 13, I went the whole hog and put down steps to place myself of a permanent position of power as the immortal God-emperor of all of Mankind and take advantage of the inevitable corruption. Step 1 was obtain god like powers. Step 2 was obtain immortality. Step 3 was to construct a religious cult where I am the head of the church. I can't remember the rest of the steps, but it was something to combat the rest of power structures of the world and construct an existential enemy that would unite mankind in the veneration of myself. I never got past step 1.
You did it backwards. Step 1. Immortality. Step 2. Bitches. Step 3. ???? Step 4. Profit.
|
On December 04 2018 01:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2018 01:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Not to mention the fantastical imagined role of what he thinks the title of Duke is. _____ On December 03 2018 23:40 JimmiC wrote:
Everyone who envisions these always sees themselves as part of the favored class. So it would be whatever religion or thing he believes and obviously he would have some important position of power where he could take advantage of the inevitable corruption of any totalitarian regime. No matter how they start (left, right, god fearing, god hating) they all end up the same. It's worse than that, he would imagine himself to be part of a hereditary group. See when I imagined the the best form of government when I was something like 13, I went the whole hog and put down steps to place myself of a permanent position of power as the immortal God-emperor of all of Mankind and take advantage of the inevitable corruption. Step 1 was obtain god like powers. Step 2 was obtain immortality. Step 3 was to construct a religious cult where I am the head of the church. I can't remember the rest of the steps, but it was something to combat the rest of power structures of the world and construct an existential enemy that would unite mankind in the veneration of myself. I never got past step 1. You did it backwards. Step 1. Immortality. Step 2. Bitches. Step 3. ???? Step 4. Profit.
Nah, DMCD is just following the Leto Atreides playbook.
|
On December 04 2018 01:31 chocorush wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2018 01:04 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Trump, having plead for 'rebuilding the military' for 716 billion dollars, and proudly presenting it as his great accomplishment + Show Spoiler +, finds out the military spending this year is whopping 716 billion dollars. An uncontrollable arms race! https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1069584730880974849I mean I'd like a stop to the arms race too, and you guys could sure use 700 billion on other things, but nothing about this combination of statements makes sense. Then again I should stop trying to find sense probably. Trump's entire gameplan is getting praise for his terrific job of kind of restoring things back to what they were before crises he created.
I like this view . Fits well with his 'great deals for US farmers with China', those same farmers who couldn't sell harvest due to his tariff wars. Solving problems by stopping to create them is easier than solving real problems because the solution is always in your hands.
|
On December 04 2018 01:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2018 21:02 ReditusSum wrote:On December 03 2018 20:57 iamthedave wrote:On December 03 2018 20:55 ReditusSum wrote:On December 03 2018 02:18 Mohdoo wrote:On December 03 2018 02:08 Acrofales wrote:On December 03 2018 00:51 Gorsameth wrote:On December 03 2018 00:42 Silvanel wrote:On December 02 2018 22:51 georgehabadasher wrote:
The article said California has 19 million registered voters, not 19 million eligible voters. Can non registered vote? No. The US uses an system here eligible voters have to register that they want to vote before actually being allowed to do so. If you didn't register in time you can't vote on election day. Its an antiquated system that one party has no interest in replacing because it would hurt their ability to suppress certain demographics from voting. A quick google gives me 25 mil eligible voters in California and 19mil registered. Donno how that compares to the rest of the US. As a foreigner living in Spain, I have to explicitly register to vote in the municipal elections. Simply being registered as living there is insufficient. It's not a hard process (they sent me a letter with a code on it that I could use on the website to register for voting), but it is something you have to do. I don't think it's so farfetched to require people to show some interest in the democratic process before election day? Assuming the process is simple and accessible for everybody. But why require it? What is gained by requiring someone to sign up? Status quo should be that someone does vote. Voting is, imo, a duty, not just a right. Choosing not to participate is unethical and I think it is good for government to encourage participation. Having less than 90% turnout is a failure. The fact that the entire planet has issues with voting participation shouldn't make us lose track of what the ideal scenario is. We have a lot of cultural work to do and I think automatic registration helps with participation frrlibg more implied than optional. I should not have to vote if I don't want to vote. I do not support democracy as a governing system so forcing me to engage in the system is an abuse of power. Interesting. What's your preference to Democracy? I'm not sure yet. I'd need to do more research. I'm leaning toward theocratic-monarchy with some democratic elements as regards to local councils and what-not; maybe some kind of National Senate appointed by the State Governors (who would be more like Dukes; a hereditary position of basically absolute authority within the State) that has some kind of advisory, possibly more important function. That awkward moment you realize some people would actually welcome The Handmaid’s Tale’s world. Theocracy-monarchy... Two centuries and a half of enlightenment, human rights, and democracy to get to the point where kids born in america want to go back to the dark age because obscurantism sounds cool.
I just read that statement as, "i kinda like facism". Strong leader + greater good for its people bullshit basically is just that.
|
Facism doesn't normally have a hereditary caste system. Or a major theocratic element.
|
« I would like fascism, but worse, please. With some dumb titles like dukes for our masters because it sounds like warhammer. Or game of thrones. Cool stuff. »
In all seriousness I think the fact that democracy is the best form of government is not an absolute consensus is one of the scariest part of the national populist era we live in.
|
|
|
Technocracy sounds like a good idea to me.. no one's ever tried it tho so it very well might just be a pipe dream. But at the very least we wouldn't have to fight with our own leaders over scientific stuff like global warming
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
