Author Topic: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy  (Read 366 times)

Lets say, you have few questions about some group. But that group exert power. If there is a small elite of people influencing the government, and they can ban you if you go too far in "your rights of free speech" then it isnt really true free speech if you think about it. I will say this, you wont get jailed for saying wrong things which is good, but still its not what i expected from a self proclaimed democracy, i just think they call it democracy because it sounds nicer than Ochlocracy

Here is atleast how i always pictured democracy being about. You have view points, some dont agree with them, some confront your ideals or view points. In the end tries to convince why you are wrong... well thats not entirely true. In reality, we live in echochamber belief. I notice this is more true among left wingers who dont want "thoughts by right wingers in their groups" while right winger form of echo chamber can exist, i just havent noticed it as much as left winger. Basically right wingers i dont think ban left wingers from opposing their point of view.



And it may sound childish, but this game ending changed my life. On how i view objective truth from group think. One is real, the other is collectivism.
Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 09:50:01 AM by Kibla92 »

Online Baruch

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2020, 10:34:49 AM »
Correct, per Athens and Rome and American Revolution, democracy is two wolves agreeing with a sheep, what to have for supper.  The US is a representative democratic republic.  Which is a problem all to itself.

As a latter-day Stalinist, I don't support voting or democracy anymore (for myself).  Democrat and Labour voters are Trots, and Stalin knew how to deal with Trots.  "It doesn't matter how you vote, it matters who counts the votes" - Stalin

There is a natural hierarchy among a pack of predators.  Humans are predators (except for psychopaths like Gandhi).  Beta males and beta females (the majority of people) don't like this reality.  Alpha males and alpha females swim with the sharks.

If you want to understand current politics, study the decline and fall of the Roman Republic and the decline and fall of the Athenian Democracy.  The first ended with Augustus as Emperor, and the second ended with Alexander as King.  Autocracy with military muscle, as recommended by Alexander Hamilton.





Alpha males lead, beta males follow.  "Bella detesta matribus. Wars are the dread of mothers" - Quintus Horatius Flaccus ... unless you are Queen Cleopatra VII.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 10:53:13 AM by Baruch »
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Offline SGOS

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2020, 11:02:47 AM »
The other shoe is about to drop.

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2020, 11:10:02 AM »
There is not a single govt. that has existed that is pure whatever label one wants to put on it.  Each is different, at least in some of the details.  As for the US govt calling itself a democracy--that has never been accurate.  The attempt was to created a constitutional republic--and it was rather loosely just that.  But some socialist ideas crept in as did our form of capitalism, with a touch of communism and now with the orange monster, authoritarian rule.  There are no pure governmental types. 

As for the left (liberal) and right (conservative), the liberal is much more likely to be a 'live and let live' type than the current conservative.  Liberals will allow one to believe what they will, but the right wants to make sure everybody believes as they do--period.  The current marriage of conservative (very authoritative) and christian leads to a totalitarian type of govt; they are very much into thought control--and demands all follow their beliefs (facts and science not allowed). 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Online Baruch

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2020, 11:13:23 AM »
The other shoe is about to drop.

High heeled or Sieg Heil-ed?
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 11:38:14 AM by Baruch »
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Online Baruch

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2020, 11:14:34 AM »
There is not a single govt. that has existed that is pure whatever label one wants to put on it.  Each is different, at least in some of the details.  As for the US govt calling itself a democracy--that has never been accurate.  The attempt was to created a constitutional republic--and it was rather loosely just that.  But some socialist ideas crept in as did our form of capitalism, with a touch of communism and now with the orange monster, authoritarian rule.  There are no pure governmental types. 

As for the left (liberal) and right (conservative), the liberal is much more likely to be a 'live and let live' type than the current conservative.  Liberals will allow one to believe what they will, but the right wants to make sure everybody believes as they do--period.  The current marriage of conservative (very authoritative) and christian leads to a totalitarian type of govt; they are very much into thought control--and demands all follow their beliefs (facts and science not allowed).

Left = Cancel Culture ... your age is showing, put away your "love beads" ;-)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2020, 11:37:43 PM »
You haven't noticed Right-Wing echo chambers? Didn't look very hard, did you? Amazing how personal bias can distort one's view of reality.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2020, 12:47:27 AM »
You haven't noticed Right-Wing echo chambers? Didn't look very hard, did you? Amazing how personal bias can distort one's view of reality.

One of my husband's regular YouTube channels:



There are other YouTube channels, podcasts, blogs and social media feeds that repeat similar messages. Algorithms create echo chambers because they give us more of what we like or hate, what we react to emotionally. Everyone wants to have their narrative reinforced. Everyone wants to interact with like-minded people, e.g. a forum for atheists.
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2020, 01:17:37 AM »
One of my husband's regular YouTube channels:



There are other YouTube channels, podcasts, blogs and social media feeds that repeat similar messages. Algorithms create echo chambers because they give us more of what we like or hate, what we react to emotionally. Everyone wants to have their narrative reinforced. Everyone wants to interact with like-minded people, e.g. a forum for atheists.

When I came here, I didn't even know if I was an atheist yet. I came here to bounce ideas off of people and discover who I was. If I tried to have the conversations I have here at christianforums.com, I'd instantly be limited to the select few subforums that aren't marked "Chrisians only," I'd be expected to adhere to strict rules limiting my ability to communicate (such as only replying in my own threads, and not topics of other nonbelievers, so they can control the discussion), and I'd be quickly banned for saying things they don't like (AKA "blasphemy"). No such strategies here. Christians can come, start whatever discussions they want, and reply in any threads that they want. Only reason they don't tend to stick around is, it turns out, open discussion about their beliefs are not healthy for an irrational faith based on zero evidence. If you come here to reinforce your preconceived notions, that's your prerogative, but don't project.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2020, 01:52:48 AM »
Only reason they don't tend to stick around is, it turns out, open discussion about their beliefs are not healthy for an irrational faith based on zero evidence. If you come here to reinforce your preconceived notions, that's your prerogative, but don't project.

Almost everyone on this forum expects evidence for stated beliefs and refuses to accept revealed truth, faith, dogma or the supernatural. The idea that beliefs should be based on evidence is the shared value that is reinforced by this group. People here want to converse with other people who use logic and reason-- this was what I was referring to when I wrote "like-minded." If forum members were using religious texts as irrefutable truth, personal revelation as evidence for their beliefs or supernatural explanations for why things happen then the rational types wouldn't stick around.
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Online Baruch

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2020, 05:32:54 AM »
You haven't noticed Right-Wing echo chambers? Didn't look very hard, did you? Amazing how personal bias can distort one's view of reality.

Right and Left, Siamese Twins separated every election ;-))

It is possible to be rational, and not woke.  Sleepy maybe, since I am posting this at 330 AM my time ;-(

Not just that every wackadoodle wants to be heard, wants positive and negative reinforcement, but want monetization (on Youtube etc).

PS ...

"...Every Time Someone Says They Don't Believe In Fiat Money, A Central Banker Loses His Wings" ... we might not have an explicit gold standard, but the world does run on an implicit gold standard.  There is a hierarchy of monetary reserves that backs fiat money, but at the bottom of all of them is gold. the precious metals stock being leveraged greatly thru gold and silver ETFs (modern gold and silver certificate cash).
« Last Edit: August 21, 2020, 11:27:29 AM by Baruch »
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Re: Western democracies arent full democracies though. Its Ochlocracy
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2020, 04:45:33 PM »
I don't think there will be a day a full democracy or a full dictatorship existing in the world.
Each democracies have thing of a dictatorship in its system.
Each dictatorship have things of a democracy in its system.

For example multipartism even if limited in some of dictatorship like the defunct "Democratic German Republic" more know as "East Germany" is an example of a dictatorship with a democratic features even if limited.
In democracy multipartism can be limited like in the nowadays "Federal Republic of Germany" where political parties against the constitution of this state are outlawed.

I take the example of multipartism because for me this is the easier to understand.

Each political regimes evolve over time. For example the French Republic (We are at the fifth republic that began in 1958. I'm a citizen of this state since I'm born and I did never had another citizenship) of 1958 isn't exactly the same in 2020 (I'm writing this message in August 2020) because there were evolution even if this is the same regime.

Each political regimes of the world are unique because they are all in a particular historical and geographical context and compare two regimes or more is inappropriate for this reason.
For example there are points in commons between the deceased "People's Republic of Poland" in 1986 that have common things with the defunct "Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" at the same time like some ideological things in common but they have things that distinguish them like their respective position about USSR dissolved in 1991 that are radically different (Poland was member of "Warsaw pact" officially know in English as "Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance" for which Soviet Union was the main member when Yugoslavia wasn't).

I don't think there are a country better than another because there are all different in all matters.

Country "A" can be better in matter "Alpha" than country "B" but country "B" can be better than country "A" in matter "Bravo".
They can be at the same level in matter "Charlie".
I use fictions countries names and fictions name for matters to explain things in a generic way.

I consider each places of the world as prisons because there are no place where you're free because freedom for me is equal to anomie (Wikipedia explain this concept).
You can change of penitentiaries but you can only live in one of these.
In some of them food is better but water is worse than your.
In some of them food is worse but water is better than your.
In some of them food is better and the water is better than yours and in some of them these two things are worse than yours.

Those imprisoned where already imprisoned by the rules of the society in which they live before going in a prison.
Those in an asylum to execute a criminal conviction (I'm not speaking of those who weren't convicted because they were considered as irresponsible of theirs acts) are in a triple prison that is "the society + prison for criminal conviction + asylum".
The worse situation is the quadruple prison "the society + prison for criminal conviction + guardianship + asylum".

I'm a French citizen who lived his whole life in French Republic. I dream to leave the territory of this state for many reasons but I don't forget leave it means only being displaced in another jail.

What we perceive to be a democracy can be seen as a dictatorship by others and vice-versa.
Each political regimes have democratic things and undemocratic things.
You will never find a state that is fully democratic or fully dictatorship.

There are not an universal manner to note a country on a particular matter and if there are not universal manners to do it we can't compare countries in all matters with an universal system.
Each of these have different parameters (Each parameters is important) and are managed by different entities and the entity who manage it can influence the objectivity of the system of comparison. Never forget no one is objective in political matters.

See this list of freedom indices : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices

Democracy Ranking , Freedom in the World  , DD Index and Democracy Index are four different index to make a comparison between countries about democratic rights.
None of them use the same methodology and none of them is operated by the same entity.
None of these index can be objective as I did already explained. Politic isn't a science.
We all agree that 2*2 = 4 but we don't all agree about political questions because these are subjective.

If you had a choice between a city in country A and another in country B your choice depend of how do you perceive the political regime of country A and country B without forget how do you perceive politic at the level of the city and province etc...
Your perception of a politic system are based on your religious and political belief , culture , what do you want and don't want , what you like and don't like etc...

You can prefer a city to another because of yours hobbies.
If you're a surfer you will likely prefer a city in which you can practice this activity than a city in which you can't.

You can prefer a city to another because of your job.
If you're a manufacturer of fire weapons you will certainly prefer an American city than a Japanese city because there are more opportunities in a city of North America than a city of Asia because the market is bigger and there are less legal constraint in NA than Asia.

If you're family live in a city you will likely prefer to live there if you are in good terms with your family.
If the majority of yours friends live in a certain city you will likely prefer to live where they are.