• MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d prefer a republic, what the hell do I know about complex foreign policies with the relationship between Sudan and Egypt, or which tax policy will spur economic growth?

    • bobman@unilem.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s fine. Just don’t complain when the people you elect go against what you think is right.

      Personally, I think direct voting would result in people voting for the matters they care about, while ignoring the ones they don’t.

      • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah, I blame the Republicans for most of the nations current woes since, you know, they tend to be behind most of them.

        Plus, how can you see how the average American acts and think we’re still good for a democracy? We need a more fitting class of people to rule, as Adams and Hamilton envisioned it.

        • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          What do you think should be the criteria to be included in “a more fitting class of people?”

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Republicans are mostly to blame. Democrats are just the lesser evil.

          Lo’ and behold, evil is still evil.

          It doesn’t make sense to support the lesser evil when you could support no evil at all.

          • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Aren’t you so lucky to be someone who can choose to sit on the fence and not suffer the consequences. Do you understand idiotic that statement is?

            Jesus Christ, I hate to do Godwins Law here but just because when you have one side that is Nazi Germany that wants to dominate the world, kill all the undesirables, all that good stuff. Then you take a gander at the British; sure, they are a world colonial empire that deserves to be shattered but they are a democracy that DOESN’T dream of world conquest and killing everyone on earth, so any nonbraindead person would pick the side of the “br’ish”.

            And you, over there just sitting there thinking “heh, one side has a small amount of evil while the other is the embodiment of evil so I’m going to do nothing.”

            Sure, an extreme example, but the principal is the exact same.

            Take Civil Rights, just because sometimes the civil rights people may be annoying and rarely takes a few things too far DOESN’T mean they’re the same as the horrific segregationists and the KKK, who’ll kill and lynch whoever they don’t like.

            Please, grow and learn.

              • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                what do you call someone who teams up with Nazis because they want to maximize their chance of holding onto power?

                The Soviet Union?

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Imagine going “My choices are between the Nazis or the British Empire” and thinking the answer is one of them and not burning the whole thing down if that’s the best it can offer you.

              You get what you settle for.

            • bobman@unilem.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Calm down. I stopped reading as soon as you came at me with animosity.

              If you want me to take you seriously, talk with less emotion and more logical reasoning.

            • thecrotch
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Between their shenanigans in India and Ireland the British empire was arguably worse than nazi Germany lmao what a dumb analogy

              • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You really are a dumbass, aren’t ya? Making an argument that the Nazis were all that bad.

                I suppose that’s fair, any concession, no matter how small, will constitute a defeat to your side so you must stand your ground and defend the undefendable.

                • thecrotch
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Oh the nazis were horrible. The British empire was worse. The Indian famine, intentionally caused by the crown, killed almost 11 million people. Why are you downplaying genocide? Couldn’t you pick a country that didn’t kill an equal amount of people as the nazis during the same time period to play the “good guys” in your scenario?

                  • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Hey stupid, the Nazis killed 6 million Jews, they killed about 11 million in the concentration camps. Imagine how many would be dead if they enacted Generalost Plan.

                    Fucking dipshit.