You're viewing a single thread.
If you think USA is like Russia, you're way off. USA is a flawed democracy. Very flawed, but still a democracy, since your votes matter. Russia is an informational autocracy. It's ruled by a spin dictator who lies the country is a democracy whilst killing his real opponents and posing clowns as his real ones. Mind you, I am Russian.
Edit: Now that I'm looking at it again, US may be considered a capitalist oligarchy, I'm fine with that classification. I do, however, disagree about Russia being one, it's informational autocracy (hence "way off" to begin with)
since your votes matter
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Believe it or not, would still take what US has over what we have any day.
Is it a bad system? Yes, I hate it as much as the next guy. Is Russia's situation better? Fuck no. It's like what you have in that picture on the right, but nobody actually voted for these people.
Obviously, I agree. We are not all the way there yet. But we WILL absolutely be just as bad as Russia in only a few short years. Mark my words. Citizen's United is never going away.
You can't be Russian, you're not on .ml! /s
USA is a flawed democracy. Very flawed, but still a democracy, since your votes matter.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/gerrymandering-explained
- Gerrymandering is deeply undemocratic.
Rather than voters choosing their representatives, gerrymandering empowers politicians to choose their voters. This tends to occur especially when line drawing is left to legislatures and one political party controls the process, as has become increasingly common. When that happens, partisan concerns almost invariably take precedence over all else. That produces maps where electoral results are virtually guaranteed even in years where the party drawing maps has a bad year.
- Gerrymandering has a real impact on the balance of power in Congress and many state legislatures.
On the state level, gerrymandering has also led to significant partisan bias in maps. For example, in 2018, Democrats in Wisconsin won every statewide office and a majority of the statewide vote, but thanks to gerrymandering, won only 36 of the 99 seats in the state assembly.
- Gerrymandering affects all Americans, but its most significant costs are borne by communities of color.
Targeting the political power of communities of color is also often a key element of partisan gerrymandering. This is especially the case in the South, where white Democrats are a comparatively small part of the electorate and often live, problematically from the standpoint of a gerrymanderer, very close to white Republicans. Even with slicing and dicing, discriminating against white Democrats only moves the political dial so much. Because of residential segregation, it is much easier for map drawers to pack or crack communities of color to achieve maximum political advantage.
True that. Yet you still see either party win the elections. In Russia, however? 80% goes to Putin and United Russia. Every. Single. Time.
Even if the people you swap out are corrupt. It's no comparison to how blatantly corrupt a person can be when he knows he'll be in power on practically every election cycle.
Yet you still see either party win the elections. In Russia, however? 80% goes to Putin and United Russia. Every. Single. Time.
Russia uses the same tricks to constrain participatory democracy as Florida or Texas. Even when a Democrat can win at the local level, the gerrymandered legislature steps in to gut the local government of authority (as Abbott did when he seized HISD).
Yes, you get to do the thing we call voting. But no, you don't get to participate in government.
It’s no comparison to how blatantly corrupt a person can be when he knows he’ll be in power on practically every election cycle
Tell Ken Paxton. Tell Rick Scott. Tell Tim Moore or Chris Kapenga. These are people in office who literally cannot lose, as the state election system operates.
If Republicans manage to move us to "EC votes by House seats" system, they'll have effectively gerrymandered the Presidency. Then there's no way for a Dem to ever win, shy of some absurd lopsided 70/30 election.
And even if the Dem DOES win, it’s basically a wash whether it is even a win since those are the same democrats that are in lockstep behind the commodification of healthcare, for profit education, real estate, police militarization, military industrial complex, banking, global shipping, and SO many more industries I failed to mention.
"Russia uses the same tricks to constrain participatory democracy as Florida or Texas."
Now imagine Texas is the entirety of US, where
- in some very specific cities you get over 100% participation rate where everybody votes for incumbent whereas the rest of them have like 30-40% with expected vote distribution to boot.
- Oh, and "electronic voting" (via the internet) where the incumbent always gets 90% of the votes with no way to verify the results.
- None of the participants are actually independent, and the ones that were are now either jailed or killed.
- And you have no way to protest the results, because
- it's against the law (despite the law contradicting constitution)
- the protest will get immediately shut down by the police
- every organizer will get jailed
And no, courts will not help. They will always side the government. No matter how ridiculous the accusations are.
That's Russia.
Edit: Forgot to mention that out electoral system is more straightforward, so it doesn't allow for gerrymandering. So it's not even distribution manipulation it's straight up the half of bulletins are fake.
Now imagine Texas is the entirety of US
Over half of Trump's cabinet is from Florida
Forgot to mention that out electoral system is more straightforward, so it doesn’t allow for gerrymandering
That's absolutely false
Over half of Trump's cabinet is from Florida
That's not the point
That's absolutely false
Explain how.
Gerrymandering is manipulation of electoral results using differently drawn district maps. Russia doesn't use districts to decide winners in each one. Instead, all of the votes are combined. Think of it as a one massive district. Whoever gets majority in that one district wins the elections. In this system votes are always proportionate to electorate, therefore gerrymandering cannot physically happen.
Instead, Russia's incumbent uses other ways of electoral fraud. Main ones I have already listed.
It’s ruled by a spin dictator who lies the country is a democracy whilst killing his real opponents and posing clowns as his real ones.
Russia needs to defend itself against NATO is not spin. That some corrupt remaining Yeltsin cronies sometimes say Russia should not, is not "useful democracy". Navaltny caught on video soliciting funds from MI6 to diminish Russia is not useful democracy.
That west needs to have war on Russia, Iran, Syria, China is more spin than opposing war.
Russia needs to defend itself against NATO is not spin.
Genuine question: why? Is NATO attacking Russia?
Of course they are, and Russia does and should know that they are. The genuine question is a symptom of all powerful disinformation propaganda "spin".
Thank you for sharing what seems like a genuine reply.
Of course they are
Could I please ask for a bit more info here? The way this is phrased, it sounds like it is obvious and goes without saying, but I haven’t heard of any NATO attacks on Russia. Is there something you would be willing to reference beyond “common knowledge”?
First, NATO is a US controlled organization, and big moves are US imperialism rather than NATO as an organization. NATO members are even more oppressed than NATO enemies.
The origins of Ukraine war provocation on Russia are in the US led coup of 2014, and subsequent pupettry of Ukraine. The US and NATO vassals have fully admitted to building up Ukraine for war in 2014, and in considering it an essential strategic objective to perpetuate the war.
US/NATO aggression towards Russia was more about colonizing former eastern block countries whose hatred and resentment could be harvested, but still clearly a buildup to current situation.
It is obvious that US/NATO has demonic hatred and diminishment ambitions against Russia. The links between wishes and military actions against Russia is also obviously direct.
Perhaps a technicality, but the US is directly bombing Russia through the recent ATACMs strikes. These require US soldiers and US GPS infrastructure to operate.
Yeah, and that's why "you need Putin," "Putin is our only leader," "no Putin, no Russia."
Doesn't that seem convenient? But that's only a part of it.
The fact that you would see it this way as a Russian makes sense. Unlike Russia, the American information space has at least retained the facade of being free and generally accurate. What you are missing is that the Republicans have been gutting our educational system for over 50 years, media consolidation has given the political establishment significant control over what ideologies are or are not given favorable coverage, and social media algorithms have been tuned to favor establishment information sources. For those with the time and inclination, it is certainly possible to be informed, and I'm sure it's easier than in Russia, but most Americans don't have the time or media sophistication to understand anything but establishment narratives. Those of us who are informed get absolutely swamped out by misinformed or outright delusional voters.
I'm aware that that's been happening in US, yes. Although I don't actually know to what extent.
What I mean by "votes actually matter" (as I assume that's what you're responding to) is that election results aren't pre-determined (not on a federal level, at the very least). Basically, it's a night and day difference between US and Russia.
Technically speaking, they matter in Russia too, even though they don't affect the results. In short, it's all because of public opinions. It's better people be disillusioned elections were falcified than be ignorantly believe they weren't. Not to mention, it, at least till recently, was also possible for opposition to win on municipal or regional level.
As for the establishment narrative, people believing in it, and media control. First two aren't unique to US, happens pretty much everywhere. I can tell that media in US is mostly controlled by conservatives. In Russia, on the other hand, there is no space for opposition on TV, which is mostly watched by older people, which are the majority of voters. Ever since Putin's first became the president, he's been silently killing off all independent news media till there was nothing left. Now he's trying to do the same with internet media, although he's much more illiterate when it comes to the internet.
USA is a flawed democracy.
Lol! You need to actually have democracy in order for it to be "flawed," genius.
Go argue with the EIU about their metrics, lol.
Do you have any clue what living in an actually undemocratic country is like? That isn't to say you should tolerate the bs your own politicians put you through, quite the opposite, actually. The mere fact you're able to protest should not be taken for granted.
Do you have any clue what living in an actually undemocratic country is like?
Of course not. I grew up in a fascist state (Apartheid-South Africa) that was most definitely classified as "democratic" by the very same western "democracies" that are now also classifying Israel as "democratic."
So no... what would I know about it?
The mere fact you’re able to protest should not be taken for granted.
They only allow you to protest until the protesting threatens the status quo. Then you'll see all these (supposedly) "democratic" states act no differently than the ones without all the liberal pretensions.
They only allow you to...
My point stands.
Being able to protest without getting immediately jailed or murdered is a massive blessing that is unachievable in autocracies. I've seen what protests look in USA, France, Germany, Poland, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia. USA, France, Poland, and Germany are incomparably more lenient than Russia or Belarus. (Kazakhstan is somewhere in-between, it's on the path of democratisation, like Ukraine was, but cannot be yet considered one).
I grew up in a fascist state that was most definitely classified as "democratic"...
I'd like you to check whether or not what you're claiming is actually the case. Because even Israel, strictly speaking, isn't classified as democracy. It's a flawed democracy.
Besides. What do you consider "fascist"? Since this word often gets thrown around with no real meaning behind it.
Anyhow, I use what information I have. If you think you're smarter than literal doctors of polytology, then go ahead and publish your own research. I'm not the one you should be complaining about set classifications to. That's kind of pointless.
Besides, what's your point to begin with? That USA is not a democracy? If so, then go ahead and read what I wrote again. My main complaint was about Russia being called an Olygarchy and thus compared to the USA, when it is far worse in reality.
My point stands.
Does it now? Germany, the UK, the US and France are all pushing through legislation that will enable less and less restrictions on the violence their kapos mete out to the non-collaborationist parts of the population... underneath all the liberal pretensions, the genocidal white supremacist fascism is shining through because it's always been there.
are incomparably more lenient
You mean their repression is less overt because their respective status quos is, for now, more stable than Russia's or Kazakhstan and not so easily threatened from below.
Because even Israel, strictly speaking, isn’t classified as democracy.
The countries that have been arming, funding and supporting Israel since 1948 (who also, purely coincidentally, all have deep histories of white supremacist and antisemitic represssion, exploitation and genocide) disagrees with you. After all, if you can call the mixture of 95% capitalism and 5% artificial democracy substitute that gets classified as "democracy" by the (so-called) west "democratic" it's not a far stretch to extend that classification to any nation that acts "white" enough - you know, like Israel and Apartheid-South Africa.
Since this word often gets thrown around with no real meaning behind it.
And it also gets thrown around with a lot of meaning behind it - and I'm always curious about people who seem to grow insecure about it when I do.
thus compared to the USA, when it is far worse in reality.
Worse for whom?
Does it now?...
Yes. Your argument is about de-democratisation. I talk about democratic vs. authoritarian.
I argue it's better to be democratic than not. You argue that countries become less democratic. Those are different topics.
You mean their...
Quite the opposite, actually. They're more lenient because they're less stable, as it's not guaranteed you'll stay in the office after everything's over. Russia's status quo from a political standpoint is the strongest it has ever been.
All political opposition has been eradicated. Everybody's threatened to speak out because they now they'll just get jailed. There can be no mass protests because the current incumbent is simply too strong to oppose.
The countries that have been...
That's not me they're disagreeing with. Again, that's not my classification. All I argue is that "artificial democracies" are far worse. Russia is one, BTW. It likes to hold a facade of being a democracy, when in reality, it's a hybrid regime (namely, informational autocracy).
And it also...
So, you decided to ignore my question and be a douche about it... I'll take it as "I don't like it, so it's fascist" then.
Worse for whom?
Citizens, obviously. How is that even a question?
I argue it’s better to be democratic than not.
You're arguing that a veneer of false democracy that exists purely to camouflage the exact same authoritarianism actually qualifies as democracy.
It doesn't.
as it’s not guaranteed you’ll stay in the office after everything’s over.
Joe Biden leaving the White House doesn't threaten the status quo in the US. You are confusing propaganda with the actual politics said propaganda is designed to obscure.
All I argue is that “artificial democracies” are far worse.
95% capitalism with 5% fake artificial democracy substitute (ie, so-called "liberal democracy) is about as artificial as "artificial democracy" gets.
This is what you don't seem to understand. The so-called "democracy" that exists in the so-called "west" is stable because their electoral politics do not threaten the interests of the class of (thoroughly unelected) billionaire parasites who runs these societies. Regimes like Russia hasn't attained this kind of stability yet - that is why the billionaire parasites that benefit from these regimes needs overt authoritarianism to protect their interests.
If the interests of this (again, thoroughly unelected) billionaire class is truly threatened in so-called "liberal democratic" states you will see them resort to the exact same type of authoritarianism. This is why ALL "liberal democracies" comes with built-in fascist institutions (such as the police and other paramilitary organisations) that can enable such authoritarian violence in the blink of an eye if necessary.
(Please don't tell me you're naive enough to believe that the police exists to protect YOU.)
In a truly democratic society, fascism couldn't exist. Capitalism couldn't exist.
The fact that they do should tell you something.
“I don’t like it, so it’s fascist”
I hate to be the one to break it to you... but Mussolini did not invent fascism. He merely gave it a name.