Right-Wing Extremism: The Village Where the Neo-Nazis Rule

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

On one hand you whine and moan to no end about the mythical elites who are out to change your way of life... and then you say you want noblesse oblige? ####### dude.

Silence, pheasant!

[Jenn! 918]

Authoritarianism starts to sound pretty good if you're the one who gets to make all the rules.

[james&olya 1,121]

If you want pragmatic and practical, then republics and especially democracies are not the way to go. But, since we have long since rejected the concepts of Noblesse Oblige and chivalry, then I guess we are stuck with the unpragmatic, the unpractical, and the ineffective.

Quite the contrary, democracy by its very nature combines the views and ideologies of all its citizens based on the aggregate consensus of the citizenry. It makes it almost impossible to follow any ideology unless you have a very homogenous populace. Of course, you can build your ideology around this very concept, that of elevating the notion of democracy above the notions of right vs left, big government vs small. If we have an ideology for our system, I think it is close to this.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Quite the contrary, democracy by its very nature combines the views and ideologies of all its citizens based on the aggregate consensus of the citizenry. It makes it almost impossible to follow any ideology unless you have a very homogenous populace. Of course, you can build your ideology around this very concept, that of elevating the notion of democracy above the notions of right vs left, big government vs small. If we have an ideology for our system, I think it is close to this.

Democracy = Anarchy. Just look at the electorate, who decided on change in 2008, and in 2010, wants it all changed back. The mob is fickle.

Authoritarianism starts to sound pretty good if you're the one who gets to make all the rules.

Coups get kinda messy, though.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Authoritarianism starts to sound pretty good if you're the one who gets to make all the rules.

That sounds like a MOB sales pitch.

[^_^ 5,021]

Silence, pheasant!

pheasant?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

pheasant?

It's whats for dinner.

[The_Dude 1,142]

pheasant?

Pheasant sounds good for lunch.

[^_^ 5,021]

Just look at the electorate, who decided on change in 2008, and in 2010, wants it all changed back. The mob is fickle.

The electorate that voted for change in 2008 was not the electorate that voted to change it back in 2010. What we have, really, is a size problem. This country would be better off split into a number of smaller and ideologically more homogeneous nations.

[james&olya 1,121]

Democracy = Anarchy. Just look at the electorate, who decided on change in 2008, and in 2010, wants it all changed back. The mob is fickle.

Coups get kinda messy, though.

I hope you say that as a joke. Anarchy vs democracy is inherently not rational. Democracy could lead to anarchy just as easily as it could lead to rigid authoritarianism. The will of the people and all that messy 'mob' rule thing.

[The_Dude 1,142]

The electorate that voted for change in 2008 was not the electorate that voted to change it back in 2010. What we have, really, is a size problem. This country would be better off split into a number of smaller and ideologically more homogeneous nations.

That's code for GTFO of California Bill.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The electorate that voted for change in 2008 was not the electorate that voted to change it back in 2010. What we have, really, is a size problem. This country would be better off split into a number of smaller and ideologically more homogeneous nations.

States, perhaps? So, you do support the Tenth Amendment. You graduate from pheasant to peacock.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The electorate that voted for change in 2008 was not the electorate that voted to change it back in 2010. What we have, really, is a size problem. This country would be better off split into a number of smaller and ideologically more homogeneous nations.

Segregation?

[^_^ 5,021]

That's code for GTFO of California Bill.

Or maybe it's code for slicing off the western coast and calling the rest of California the Texas Autonomous Region.

Segregation?

No, secession.

States, perhaps? So, you do support the Tenth Amendment. You graduate from pheasant to peacock.

No, not states. Nations. Expecting any man or woman to be President of both Texas and Massachusetts is crazy.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No, secession.

So if a large enough body of White Supremists want to form their own autonomous country, you'd be okay with that?