SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the When-in-the-course-of-human-events... dept.
Margaret Atwood's novel, The Handmaid's Tale, described the horror of the authoritarian regime of Gilead. In this theocracy, self-preservation was the best people could hope for, being powerless to kick against the system. But her sequel, The Testaments, raises the possibility that individuals, with suitable luck, bravery and cleverness, can fight back.
But can they? There are countless examples of past and present monstrous regimes in the real world. And they all raise the question of why people didn't just rise up against their rulers. Some of us are quick to judge those who conform to such regimes as evil psychopaths – or at least morally inferior to ourselves.
To answer this question, let's start by considering a now classic analysis by American organisational theorist James March and Norwegian political scientist Johan Olsen from 2004.
They argued that human behaviour is governed by two complementary, and very different, "logics". According to the logic of consequence, we choose our actions like a good economist: weighing up the costs and benefits of the alternative options in the light of our personal objectives. This is basically how we get what we want.
But there is also a second logic, the logic of appropriateness. According to this, outcomes, good or bad, are often of secondary importance – we often choose what to do by asking "What is a person like me supposed to do in a situation like this"?
The idea is backed up by psychological research. Human social interactions depend on our tendency to conform to unwritten rules of appropriate behaviour. Most of us are truthful, polite, don't cheat when playing board games and follow etiquette. We are happy to let judges or football referees enforce rules. A recent study showed we even conform to arbitrary norms.
[...] A small number of us, however, would rebel – but not primarily, I suspect, based on differences in individual moral character. Rebels, too, need to harness the logic of appropriateness – they need to find different norms and ideals, shared with fellow members of the resistance, or inspired by history or literature. Breaking out of one set of norms requires that we have an available alternative.
Would you stand up to an oppressive regime or would you conform?
Do you agree with this analysis? What would you do in such situations?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 11 2019, @12:31AM (63 children)
There really aren't much over 3 percent of people who support any given political movement. It has been a long-accepted truth that 3 percent of the colonists were actually in rebellion against England. That 3 percent moved the rest of the country.
The article has it at least partly right. 90 percent or more of the people will just follow any established leadership, and at most, they might whine and bitch about things. Most people have no will of their own.
But, there ARE those 3 percent.
Watch - every brainwashed D and R on this site is going to bounce into this discussion, claiming to be a 3 percenter. If you want to be believed, show us your bona fides.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DavePolaschek on Friday October 11 2019, @12:36AM (21 children)
Been keeping my head down for decades. Don’t see much reason to change now.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @12:50AM (1 child)
You're in good company [glasswings.com].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:57AM
My battlestation is fully operational.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @01:24AM (18 children)
And I go out of my way to break the colour barrier every chance I get, because the only thing more fucked up than white privilege is male white privilege. I've experienced both, and the loss of male privilege was a real eye-opener, so I fight the good fight.
I've tried to change things in the past by running for office as an independent. Didn't change anything. You really want to change things, you've got to use the courts.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilPapa on Friday October 11 2019, @01:52AM
Absolutely. One of the most surprising things about getting older is how it's radicalized me. I get more dangerous with every passing year.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @01:54AM (5 children)
Got any reads for individuals' personal experience of the change of male privilege from both sides of the, uh ... knife (?).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:10PM (1 child)
Knife lol.
Always the voyeuristic obsession. The oblig conclusion: only somebody who is mentally ill would give up male privilege, such as Nora Vincent. Clearly mentally ill to reject male privilege. Not only that, but she fits the profile of an incel as well, attending male groups full of incels and expecting that womyn want anything to do with her..... (Google or duck the name before flaming!!! Then once googling or ducking accomplished, flame away!)
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday October 12 2019, @12:54AM
As for transsexuality being a mental illness, the medical establishment disagrees. Sorry, but male or is toxic for everyone - the men who can't count on the same level of emotional support from other men that women get from each other, and the toxic consequences of testosterone-driven competition.
Ideally there should be no privilege - not male, not white, not class, to name a few. As one example of political privilege, just look at Hunter Biden. He would never have gotten a $50,000 a month job sitting on a Ukrainian board of directors if his father hadn't been Joe Biden. The Trumps have brought nepotism to the inner sanctum if they White House, but Biden is no angel.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday October 12 2019, @01:29AM (2 children)
That's the opposite of my experience (and quite common for trans women). All of a sudden, your contributions are minimized before they're appropriated. Your talk time in meetings is drastically cut back. The men at the table talk around you as if you're not there. You're paid less.
In other words, treated the same as any other woman.
So whenever I hear men say there's no such thing as male privilege, I think "try walking in my shoes."
There are good things, such as the support of other women, which I think of as the sisterhood. Think of it as a nicer female equivalent of "bro culture." It's nice to be able to give or receive a hug as needed, to be able to talk about more than just work, guy stuff, and sexual wants that are often spoken loudly enough to be considered sexual harassment to the women present.
Once you've experienced both sides, there's no way to not be aware of the sexism that undermines so much of our daily lives. It's also inevitable that it turns some of us into vocal feminists - or in my case, advocates for equality in all aspects, not just sex.
But look around - or ask people. It might be hard to find someone who is trans and willing to talk about it (I've been called a liar for saying I was assigned male at birth, so maybe I need to buy a t-shirt saying "trans women are women " or something). Me, I just find it's was easier to just assume that the grapevine has clued people in, and to answer questions that are legit. It's easier than depending on people to keep a secret (many people can't keep secrets as juicy as this anyway).
It makes life interesting, to say the least. Most people are accepting, but some can be out-and-our assholes,but that's no surprise.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday October 12 2019, @03:20AM (1 child)
I know! "Trans-Inclusionary Moderate Feminist".
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday October 12 2019, @02:09PM
I hope he loses the election. He's been caught lying on TV too many times.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @02:13AM (1 child)
Obviously someone deranged enough to cut off their own dick is who you want to go to for quality life lessons. I'm sure the poor stupid minorities are really appreciative of how you step in and white knight away all their problems with your wealthy white former male privilege.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday October 13 2019, @12:28AM
You should be so lucky.
In most places with universal health care, it's a surgical team who constructs the vagina and clitoris, not someone who's desperate. Even places like Cuba and Iran pay for it because it's a medical necessity for the persons wellbeing.
You're a dying breed. Even in the last 5 years I've seen much more acceptance. More laws protecting people like me. And more legal risk in attacking us.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @03:12AM (1 child)
So you thinking of identifying as a man again?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @11:58PM
Second, I don't want to. It was the right thing to do for me, and an acknowledgment of what and who I am. Simply can't change that if I wanted to.
Besides, who wants to go through the paperwork? And while most of the people who I work with know I was born male, they've never seen me that way. Neither have my neighbours. It's been quite a while. Even my dogs wouldn't know me.
Then there's the additional costs of things like clothes, etc.
Plus it's not for me - I'd rather be dead. But nice try.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Friday October 11 2019, @04:49AM (4 children)
Indeed yes. Don't take crap lying down. I've given city hall an earful on several occasions. I was furious over a notice alleging that I had violated their lawn care ordinances. It wasn't the particular matter of the lawn, it was the whole tone of the document, talking to the recipients like they're lazy, disobedient scum who don't care about their neighbors property values, don't take pride in the neighborhood, etc. Took for granted that the recipient would agree that a well mowed lawn was a good thing. I gave my local representative Hell, reminding her that whoever the f*** she thought she was, she was not entitled to talk down to good citizens in that fashion, as if we were naughty, irresponsible children and she was The Queen. Then I stopped in at the department responsible for policing these matters, and blasted them too. In the next election, I voted against all the incumbents. The incumbent mayor lost, and the representative of my area hung on that time but had to quit the following election when a term limit measure passed.
I also fought back against another city that pulled that red light camera crap on me. I made certain that they would not profit off of me, by demanding a hearing. I didn't expect to win, although I prepared evidence that they cheat by mistiming the lights. Then I boycotted them. I don't buy anything in that city any more. They have now lost much more in sales tax revenue than they took from me in that one incident.
When the big banks helped tank the economy in 2008, I moved my money. Closed my account at Bank of America, and moved the money to a small, local bank with a good reputation.
Then there's medical bills. I've told a few doctors to shove their bills. Jerks were trying to get me to pay what the health insurer was supposed to pay. And they weren't trying to collect the insured rate either, they were asking for the list price, which was more than double.
If more people would stand up and fight back, neither businesses nor elected officials would get away with so much crap. Like, those rules that theaters have, about no outside food and no camcorders? We, the people, could break them in an instant and force them to repeal those petty rules of theirs, if only there was the will.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 11 2019, @02:11PM (1 child)
I applaud your integrity. It's a pity you can't train others to exhibit the same fortitude.
You are absolutely right that government officials would not get away with half of what they do if people really fought back. But the officials are not idle in their corruption: they are constantly playing a thousand tricks to confuse or mislead or exhaust the public such that nobody ever asks them hard questions. At the end of the day, nothing gets their attention so well as a kick in the pants, which is what so very many of them need.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday October 12 2019, @03:34AM
Are they really? It seems like they're more a bunch of C-students who had good people skills, trying to make their way through a maze of many, many competing priorities and laws one day at a time, rather than according to some grand plan. I'd think that kick in the pants is just one of those many priorities that bubbles up to the top. Hell, I bet some of the smarter, more boring ones would prefer to talk about the nuances of the hard issues than about the latest news cycle fodder.
The only politician who I ever got a sense was trying to actually plan their tenure was Obama, when he started working by getting websites and stuff ready starting on election day+2.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 11 2019, @02:18PM
Way to go. I like a good fight/argument/whatever. I'll argue with the bastards even if it doesn't really matter, just because they were assholes, and they NEED to be argued with.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday October 12 2019, @03:49AM
I wonder if this the kind of thing the newspapers/newsmagazines -- maybe based in a neighboring area -- could get involved in. It's something so blatant that a reporter could video the lights and mark timings on them, and report on both how that city is full of crooks and that their (rival) sports team sucks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @08:01PM (1 child)
"because the only thing more fucked up than white privilege is male white privilege"
Oh STFU. It's a birthright, not a privilege. A birthright we've been squandering for far too long.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday October 12 2019, @12:08AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:49AM
I'll follow a movement... electronically from the safety of my bunker.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:54AM (30 children)
Looking at the results after 2+ centuries, I doubt that was a Good Thing™
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @01:25AM (28 children)
First democracy of any size since Rome.
Brought the rest of the world the model for a republic based on a written constitution with a democratically elected President who served only 4 or 8 years and a Congress and Judiciary to keep each other in check, plus a written Bill of Rights.
No king, no dictator, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press to criticize the govt.
This was copied by newly independent countries the world over. Not a bad legacy for that alone.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @01:37AM (9 children)
Explain why the President rules by Executive Order while ignoring Congress, ignoring Judiciary, ignoring Constitution, ignoring Bill of Rights, and all the while tweeting propaganda on Twitter just like a dictator.
Maybe you should consider how your precious American Republic became an American Empire instead. The same happened to Rome, did you notice.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @01:48AM
I used to think that my life was a tragedy. But now I realize it's history.
(Score: 1, Troll) by khallow on Friday October 11 2019, @02:32AM (7 children)
Maybe you should consider what an empire is.
No, because the two are very different. For example, the Roman Republic and Empire grew in territory when it was healthy and growing in power, and shrunk when it was in decline. The territory of the US with the minor exceptions of Hawaii and the territories, was at its present territorial extent in 1867 with the purchase of Alaska from Russia. What empire achieves its maximum power more than a century after it has stopped expanding in territory? You won't find it.
I imagine you are instead referring to the global trade/treaty network as the US "empire" even though these benefit other powerful states than just the US, such as the EU, India, and China, all which are comparable or larger in size and population to the US.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @03:03AM (1 child)
You're just proving American Exceptionalism, buddy. Greatest empire the world has ever seen wields power on a global scale without conquering any new territory at all. Cultural empire, economic empire, military empire, legal empire. American law is world law enforced by banana republics and constitutional monarchies alike. American government is the closest thing to one world government that the world has ever seen. America is all.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 11 2019, @03:23AM
But "globalism, yay", right? Be careful what you ask for in government, it's going to be of the monkey's paw variety every single time.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 11 2019, @03:26AM (4 children)
The US is an empire though. It was since day one. The word "state" does not mean "territory within a nation". It means "nation". It did when we formed this more perfect union and it still does in every relevant context except when you're speaking with federalists and those they've deluded.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 11 2019, @04:00AM (3 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @05:04AM (1 child)
Shut up, khallow, you are in over your head, out of your depth, you know not of what you speak, you are embarrassing yourself in front of all the Soylentils, again. Just stop, khallow. Before it gets worse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @05:09PM
If, as the saying goes, one can tell a good idea by its detractors, I think that you've done some good boosting of khallow's words.
Solid job. 8/10. Could have used a bit more frothing.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 11 2019, @06:12PM
Sounds like the US to me. I mean we're three times the size of the Roman Empire at its peak and we most definitely have enough geographic cultural differences to qualify.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Friday October 11 2019, @01:54AM (1 child)
You don't follow the news, do you?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @07:24PM
You suffer from a myopic obsession with Trump and poor reading comprehension.
Reread my post. Trump will not be president forever. That's how China and Turkey work, not the US. Never.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by looorg on Friday October 11 2019, @02:15AM (2 children)
When one talks about the glory of Rome the Republic was already a thing of the past. It was gone, at the height of their (roman) power the Republic had not been a thing for 150-200 years, depending on when you consider them to be at their height of their power and such. No dictator? They invented the title, they appointed lots of them. Gaius Julius Caesar was appointed dictator two or three times and they found him so great at it that they eventually just made him dictator for life. As dictator they would attained the full authority of the entire state to resolve an issue as they saw fit, once completed they resigned or gave said powers back. Until that wasn't cool anymore and Gaius being so great and all, that is until they assassinated him and then decided to have a good old civil war and then transform into an Empire instead.
So the US republic is or was not the Roman Republic, unless of cause you subscribe to the train of thought that the USA is a brutal military imperium spanning large parts of the known world.
(Score: 3, Touché) by coolgopher on Friday October 11 2019, @03:44AM
Funny you should mention that...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @02:57PM
Yes, that criminal oligarchy failed due to the feudal corruption within it's aristocracy that escalated into outright war. Caesar was the most corrupt and psychopathic member of the political class but also a populist. We've progressed so much that we now call bread and circuses "liberal democracy".
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday October 11 2019, @03:35AM (4 children)
The Presidential system is crap, and the Constitution should be rewritten. I'll give the founders the benefit of the doubt: they didn't have a lot of great models at the time, and thought they were designing a good system with healthy checks and balances, but it hasn't worked out that way in practice, and has really fallen apart in recent decades.
Sure, England and the rest of Europe were a little slow to eliminate the monarch as head-of-state, but the Parliamentary system is objectively better (though not perfect, as the Brexit debacle is showing, but it's not as bad as what's going on in the USA). The problem with Presidential systems like in countries such as El Salvador, Honduras, Turkey, Russia, and the USA, is that the President has too much power, and is elected separately from the legislative body. In the US, this results in massive gridlock when the different election cycles and the way the system works results in the executive and the legislative branch being at odds with each other, which has been normal for a couple decades now, and is why nothing seems to get done. By contrast, in Parliamentary nations, the executive is elected by the legislature, so there's rarely any big conflict between the two. And the parliament is elected by the people, by allowing them to vote for various different parties (not just 2), so many different parties get seats in parliament, giving proportional representation instead of the winner-takes-all type system we have here. And when there is a giant conflict between Parliament and the prime minister, they end up calling a vote of no confidence and having new elections (unlike the US where we're stuck with everyone until their term is up). Government shutdowns lasting a month simply *do not happen* in a parliamentary system, but they're increasingly normal in America.
The US can be proud of being an early adopter, yes. But everyone else has already leap-frogged us, and it's time to catch up. We're like some elderly person who was an early adopter of touch-tone telephone, but now refuses to give it up while everyone else has a 3-camera OLED smartphone.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Friday October 11 2019, @04:36AM (2 children)
How?
And that differs from parliamentary systems how? They have gridlock too - the rival political factions don't go away just because someone puts together a majority for a time.
What's supposed to be objectively better about that? It's naive to assume that a legislature that does something is better than one that doesn't. Part of the power of the US system is the conflict between legislature and executive reduces the power of a faction to cause problems or undermine democracy. It's a feature not a bug.
This genuine problem has nothing to do with the Presidential versus Parliamentary systems.
Not the only source of problems. Parliamentary systems are notorious for turning over government leadership at unpredictable times. Societies already have a considerable amount of uncertainty, particularly in capitalist economic systems and democratic political systems. One doesn't need to artificially introduce it.
With what? Let us keep in mind that these "leap-frogged" systems often don't last more than a few decades. France and Italy, for example, have gone through a number of parliamentary systems in the past couple of centuries. And the EU is starting to show the cracks that'll lead to an EU 2.0.
My take is that the few genuine problems of the US approach are things like first-past-the-post and the growing complexity of law and regulation. The first could be fixed (though one would have to get the changes past the present two party system), but the second is a universal problem of all governments. There isn't that much that can be fixed by changing the present Presidential system approach.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday October 28 2019, @01:55AM (1 child)
>How?
I already explained how. Read the post.
>And that differs from parliamentary systems how? They have gridlock too
No, not like ours. Again, I already explained this. Did you read the whole post? Parliamentary systems do not have gridlock that results in the whole government shutting down for a month. It's almost impossible; in those systems, they'll have new elections, which will clear the gridlock. Our gridlock is caused by the fact that our executive is separately elected, and on different cycles, plus the stupid Electoral College system (so the President can be elected by a minority, while the majority elects a different party in Congress).
>What's supposed to be objectively better about that?
You think having a government shutdown for a month is "better"? I don't know about you, but in my world, a government that isn't operating and providing the services it's supposed to is a broken system.
>It's naive to assume that a legislature that does something is better than one that doesn't.
This sounds like some kind of stupid "small government" mentality. I'm sorry, a legislature that's not actually doing the job of governing is broken; the whole reason to have a government is to govern. A government that isn't doing that is broken. I don't know how to make this any more clear, when it's entirely self-evident.
>Part of the power of the US system is the conflict between legislature and executive reduces the power of a faction to cause problems or undermine democracy. It's a feature not a bug.
This makes no sense whatsoever. If a minority faction is causing gridlock, that's not "democracy" at all, it's a "bug". A properly designed government will have proportional representation so different factions can all have votes in the legislature, proportional to the number of votes they get in the elections. But minority factions shouldn't be able to stop government because they don't like something; that's not how a functional democracy works.
>Parliamentary systems are notorious for turning over government leadership at unpredictable times.
Why is that a problem? How is it better to have government shutdowns? Healthy democracies are by nature unpredictable; they're supposed to answer to the people. If you want predictable, maybe China's system would be more to your liking. The wishes of the electorate changes as times change and as they get new information or want to do things differently. This is a feature, not a bug.
>And the EU is starting to show the cracks
And the US isn't? I don't see any armed militias forming in the EU and calling for a new civil war. I do in the US.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 31 2019, @02:15AM
What actually is the consequence of such a shutdown? It only lasts a month. Now compare that to the decades of problems of the PIGS of the EU.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @08:05PM
you're fucking moron.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday October 11 2019, @05:02AM
Wow! Just, Wow! I guess I should add more since last time I did not, and was spam-modded for "Wow".
Democracy? Rome? Are you ignorant, just American?
Which is why England has a Congress and a President Boris right now. (See above, ignorant) And you do realize that originally there was no term limit on American Presidents? It was only after FDR was elected four times that the Republicans realized the only way they could ever get back in was to raise tax rates on the wealthy to 90%, run a General, and limit the president to two consecutive terms. They have regretted it every time one of their own has had to step down. Remember all those people calling for "Four More Years" for W? Or was that "Impeach the torturer!"?
Yes, would be, if in fact any of it were correct. You are too stupid to be a member of an actual democracy. Obviously an American, where they pride themselves on being stupid, and electing stupid presidents. Trump is so stupid he referred to Nepal as "Nipple", and Bhutan as "Button", and Ukraine as "get me some dirt on Biden." True story!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @07:27AM
Term limits are undemocratic. Most of the arguments for Term Limits are basically the same arguments you can use against letting people vote for whoever they want instead of an undemocratic "blessed few". :)
If your country or elections are so screwed up that the elections are significantly rigged then term limits won't help either.
With term limits more of the power tends to move to nonelected people/groups.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @07:46AM
false [wikipedia.org]
Too bad it had to die to let this legacy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:14PM
This is an interesting discussion since right now the Rojavans, Kurdish, Assyrian, and many others who banded together under the triple threat of Assad, Erdogan, and Daesh, are right now being, at best, occupied, and at worst, massacred. I don't have boots on the ground and there are limited active Rojavan/Kurdish sites on web search (half are parked pages now.)
It's time to think about what kind of future we really want and what we are willing to do to get it there. If we wait much longer it will be too late.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 11 2019, @02:27PM (2 children)
*cough cough*
The US is not a democracy. It is a republic.
Note that Benny didn't even say "democratic republic", he said, without any qualifications, that we had a "republic".
We could end democratic elections, and still retain the republic.
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday October 11 2019, @03:58PM (1 child)
The United States is a democracy, we are also a republic. Neither one invalidates the other.
I have never understood this argument, what exactly are you trying to prove here? Other than a penchant for pedantry combined with a lack of understanding of the terminology.
Why would this anecdote, be definitive of our government?
In contrast the constitution explicitly states that "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States" later the 17th amendment added "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, ..."
Our federal legislative branch is a representative democracy. As are the majority of state and local governments, the only exceptions I am aware of are when you get local enough to be discussing direct democracies, which have been part of American governance from the beginning.
You could NOT end those processes and retain THIS republic, they are baked into the foundational documents, they are neither optional nor accidental. And your statement otherwise is flat unsupportable.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 11 2019, @04:40PM
This article sums it up better than I can - https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/7631-a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it [thenewamerican.com]
We are a republic, with democratically elected representavies. We most assuredly are not a democracy.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday October 12 2019, @10:30PM
looks like a nice place, where is it?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Friday October 11 2019, @03:10AM
Compared to what? The British appear to be having enough trouble ruling their own island at the moment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @01:02AM (1 child)
In 2012, the American Jewish population was estimated at between 5.5 and eight million, depending on the definition of the term, which constitutes between 1.7% and 2.6% of the total U.S. population.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @01:26AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @01:21AM
Another reason why writing your congresscritters [lawsandsausagescomic.com] may (*may*) have a greater effect than you expect, especially on esoteric subjects like electronic privacy and crap that only tech nerds give more than a candy bar's [bbc.co.uk] care about.
If you don't know what to write about, in the case of privacy, maybe you could just excerpt the EU electronic privacy laws (hell, even older ones), send them to your congresspeople, and ask your electronic privacy nerd friends to write in too. Mention that whiny tech companies and financial institutions already have to follow those laws in the EU, so they can just change that record in their database for the US to apply the policies without having to do any additional work, and don't let them tell you otherwise. They could even make it opt-in ("Click here to apply EU-Frog-level privacy rules to your account").
The best part is you can reuse the same letters for all the congresspeople, every year, whether they're the same ones or get replaced, until they decide to catch us up to the EU in terms of privacy, unless they want to let the EU beat Murica. You could even send copies to EU representatives too so they can make fun of the US congresspeople when they can't protect the privacy of their own citizens from their own businesses.
Hey, differing EU standards worked (de facto) for micro-USB. why not for other stuff?
I'll guess that a bunch of nerds sending the same letters annually to geographically disparate congressional representatives for say ... five years in succession, after major breaches, may be enough of a reminder that this issue won't go away, and that you'll keep writing and spreading the word as long as big business is willing to lobby against it. Well, at least until us old people go away and the kids valuing access over privacy -- hey, I'm not judging, it's their choice -- start calling the decisions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @07:00PM
Three Percenters are a right-wing terrorist group, they are Oaf keepers. They supported wacko Mormons trying to steal a Wildlife Reserve. The supported neo-Nazis at Charlottesville. Mostly, they are undercover FBI and ATF agents.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Reziac on Saturday October 12 2019, @03:06AM (4 children)
In high school they put us through a battery of aptitude tests. (Several hours worth; they were thorough.)
Mine came back "Skewed off scale; retest."
Well, at least I've got the non-conforming part down pat...
As to whether I'd stand up to an oppressive regime.. I doubt any of us can really know that til we see the gun barrels swinging our way.
In days of yore, live "killer" games were a thing -- two hunters, everyone else prey, but with a way to 'kill' the hunters -- IF the prey could cooperate to do so. When I was assigned to the prey group, I was the =one= person whose immediate reaction was to try to organize my fellows to take out our 'oppressors'. Unfortunately, I was entirely alone in this, so eventually we all 'died'.
There's a lesson or two in there...
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday October 12 2019, @01:38PM (3 children)
One thing is certain. Predator and prey don't think alike. That is equally true in the animal world, and the human world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 12 2019, @04:41PM (1 child)
Blech, top minds stuff right here.
Do you have to practice being so stupid?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 13 2019, @02:19AM
There are also the children, such as yourself, who insist on butting into adult conversations over your heads.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday October 13 2019, @02:02AM
Yep, absolutely the case.
Tho in humans, we actually fall into three groups: wolves, sheep, and flock-guardian dogs. But dogs are just civilized wolves.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @12:36AM (12 children)
Just read up on some plain old animal psychology. If you wanna be cool, know your Freud, Jung, and Reich... Along with Nietzsche and Voltaire of course.
People respond to strength. Might makes right... even in defiance.. That's why the prez is popular, and Apple sucks balls
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @01:22AM
Well, what I've heard is that you can't teach an old dog new tricks. I don't know how that applies here, though.
(Score: 4, Disagree) by ilPapa on Friday October 11 2019, @01:58AM (6 children)
The prez is historically unpopular. So unpopular, it's actually unprecedented.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday October 11 2019, @02:36AM
And with any luck soon to be un-Presidented...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Friday October 11 2019, @02:42AM (4 children)
Look at the polls [fivethirtyeight.com]. Trump is tied with Obama, slightly less popular than Reagan, and more popular than Carter at this point in his presidency. Clinton and both Bushes were ahead. But Trump is not the least popular.
(Score: 2) by qzm on Friday October 11 2019, @06:16AM
Dont try and wave reality in front of the signalers, it just riles them up.
The fact that this article needed to lead with a Fictional situation should be enough to let you know that its best to just ignore.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Saturday October 12 2019, @12:44AM (2 children)
The difference is, Trump was never popular. His approval ratings across all polls has averaged in the low to mid-40s from the day he was inaugurated. All of the others at least spend some time out of the red.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Saturday October 12 2019, @08:24AM (1 child)
Oh well, the press has been throwing crap at him from day 1. Look at the recent Bush's 8-year popularity (and he benefited hugely from 9/11). It will be hard from Trump to under-perform that.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Saturday October 12 2019, @02:54PM
Whine, whine, whine.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 3, Touché) by JoeMerchant on Friday October 11 2019, @02:01AM (3 children)
Don't forget Milgram...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @03:27AM (2 children)
Milgram and Pavlov and Skinner, oh my!
Anyway, the use of "appropriateness" sounds fishy, so condescending and superficial...
Look at the anti-sex religions as the most successful tool of oppression. It kills the the desire to rebel through guilt. Starts when they punish the kid for playing with himself. Stop that! Rebellion is sinful! Against God! That shit works.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday October 11 2019, @01:27PM (1 child)
Or backfires, usually both - leading to the classic Catholic guilt/schizo disorder.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @06:21PM
A quick tour through the Vatican's vaults and market portfolios will show you just how schizo and "disorderly" they are...
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @12:40AM (16 children)
What's at stake for you, in/tangibly either way?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:57AM (15 children)
Nothing, nothing at all. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Just because the top dog is a power hungry megalomaniac, doesn't mean the biggest meanest groups that can oppose him aren't made of power hungry megalomaniacs either.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @01:04AM (14 children)
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Informative) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @01:37AM (5 children)
Try going through life with no purpose because "serving people makes the people a new tyrant". See how much you need a sense of purpose and worth that doing things that people value gives.
Why do you think retired people volunteer? People retire, they die. Volunteer work can help postpone that. And it's not tyranny because you can quit any time or go somewhere else - there's a huge shortage of experienced volunteer workers.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @02:05AM (2 children)
And these people really need ... what is it a lathe makes? You know what, I'll just take your word that people need stuff lather-ed.
I'll need some backup here, but I'm guessing so that you can get that sweet, sweet nectar of both fulfillingly working your ass off for a while and then telling your evil boss to kiss your ass -- except now, you can do it every year. It'll be like a birthday present!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @06:11AM (1 child)
Vapid
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @06:22AM
Mediocre! Immortan Joe does not approve.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 11 2019, @03:23AM
A slave master values the work output of the slave. That doesn't mean the slave has a sense of purpose and worth.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @03:34AM
Our singular "purpose" is reproduction, just like all lifeforms. We have a brain and do things so we can enjoy it. If you read the quote in context, you might laugh a little.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @01:42AM (2 children)
BTW, just what is a straight job? And how do I tell them apart from the rest (asking for a friend)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @02:33PM (1 child)
Just for your edification: Queers do queer jobs, and straights do straight jobs. That wasn't hard, was it?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday October 11 2019, @11:37PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Zinho on Friday October 11 2019, @01:47AM (4 children)
What's that a quote from? I'd be interested in reading it.
Also, to answer the question you asked, anarchist syndicates [existentialcomics.com] have perhaps gotten a bad rap over the years. I wouldn't mind so much doing engineering work for an anarchist syndicate if it's the type described by William Godwin. [wikipedia.org]
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday October 11 2019, @01:56AM (1 child)
What's that a quote from?
The Ultimate Truth, man! [rapeutation.com]
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @08:20AM
Those are excellent books, but I rate his Schrödinger's Cat trilogy higher. Just get the individual books, not the cut-down omnibus edition.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @03:27AM (1 child)
The Spanish Civil War showed us that anarchism is merely another powergrab, of course, they won't call themselves a government, yet it is everything in fact, a government. They do their best to "encourage" everyone in their territory to join their co-op by preventing members from trading with non-coop members and vice versa. Everything is on "volunteer" basis of course, no compulsion better the threat of the threat of being ostracized.
The war was such a shit show that it made Orwell write 1984.
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Saturday October 12 2019, @01:48PM
So, kinda like.a labor union, but with a broader scope?
Incidentally, I have read 1984, and I don't remember it being about the excesses of a cooperative decentralized society.
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @12:43AM (11 children)
If you are struggling to feed yourself and your family, you bend.
If you experienced better life, and you expect better for you or at least for your offsprings, you fight.
We humans aren't so removed from Pavlov's dogs.
(Score: 2) by EJ on Friday October 11 2019, @01:05AM (1 child)
If you are struggling to feed yourself and your family, you may have nothing to lose, so you rebel.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @01:35AM
Not if you can feed your family by bending, and that's bootstompers offer.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday October 11 2019, @01:42AM
Or maybe you're this guy [youtube.com].
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday October 11 2019, @02:03AM
Not so much, really... If you experienced better life AND you have sufficient wealth/power to effect positive change for you or at least your offsprings, you attempt to bribe some politicians.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 11 2019, @03:19AM (5 children)
And then there are those of us who are just born contrary. Or those who value liberty over comfort. Or plenty of other reasons your oversimplified explanation ignore.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday October 11 2019, @05:43AM (4 children)
Come, now, Buzzfeeder! We all know you are not Cheyenne or Lakota! The heyoka was not a think among tribes of the SouthEast that were deathmarched to Oklahoma. You are no Contrary Warrior, Buzz.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @02:51PM (1 child)
Funny, how much that sounds like prejudice. You've stereotyped the Cheyenned and Lakota into some kind of super warriors, and South Eastern tribes are - what, exactly? Boot lickers? Non-fighters, at the least?
Maybe you should head off to your favorite search engine, and research red stick, and red flag, and red rope along with various tribal names. Any tribe with a red stick legend was a warrior tribe.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday October 11 2019, @06:48PM
This is what happens, I guess, when I do not provide a citation. You might want to utilize your favorite search engine to look up "heyoka", before you misinterpret and display your ignorance.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 11 2019, @06:14PM (1 child)
I culturally appropriated it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Funny) by aristarchus on Friday October 11 2019, @06:41PM
Indian
givertaker? Well played, Sir, well played!(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 11 2019, @04:46AM
That's rule one for tyranny. You don't threaten the person, you threaten the family.
It doesn't always work, particularly if the revolt is strong or crafty enough to keep the tyrant from making good on their threats.