"a state financed system...." would be trusted by no one.

Democracy is always problematic.

Those who hold any position in current system have no interest in democracy.

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 13:36 utc | 1

It's the Golden Rule of capitalism: them as has the gold, rule. This is a great example of how it works!

Posted by: David Aitch | Aug 8 2023 13:37 utc | 2

If the final vote can be overturned by the "big electors" and the DNC is considered "a private club" with no legal obligation to abide by the law, and if the results require more than a week to be published in the country that went to the moon and back, don't talk about democracy.

Posted by: Reaves | Aug 8 2023 13:38 utc | 3

Founding father John Jay: "the people who own the country ought to govern it" ... through representatives, of course.

Posted by: Caliman | Aug 8 2023 13:39 utc | 4

Pence is horrible. Would never be president anyway.

Trumpers hate his guts (if he has any which hw probably doesnt. Hes made out of wood)

Its Joe or Bust for the Empire. (Or Kamala or Buttman if Joe dies)

Posted by: Comandante | Aug 8 2023 13:40 utc | 5

We live in an Oligarchy in the west

Posted by: Covidiot | Aug 8 2023 13:43 utc | 6

Welcome to the Hunger Games where sponsors are king and the people mean nothing.

Posted by: First Time Poster | Aug 8 2023 13:43 utc | 7

thanx b. for refocusing from Ukraine.

Corruptocracy. It can never be fair. I wonder why do they bother with elections at all?

Posted by: whirlX | Aug 8 2023 13:45 utc | 8

Representative democracy is inherently corrupt. The technology exists to ensure direct democracy and no one has enough currency to bribe half the population.

Posted by: David Kidger | Aug 8 2023 13:52 utc | 9

The certain thing is that our political system is broke. That is the certain thing. For now we are running on our accumulated social capital from the past, thus not falling apart completely. By my lights the Republicans are not the problem so much as not the solution. Oh, you know, the symbolic opposition to the 'system'. Pence hardly a major problem. A disappoint for Trump and too mediocre to win the big prize.

Posted by: Jmaas | Aug 8 2023 13:55 utc | 10

The US is not a democracy. Nor does the US care about the will of the people. If they did and we were, there would be no barriers to the participation of potential candidates. But what they want to do is keep the range of choices small so that they can control it.

Posted by: Jeff Harrison | Aug 8 2023 13:56 utc | 11

Fine, if it's a donor threshold debate, let Tucker Carlson be the one asking the questions.

Posted by: Morongobill | Aug 8 2023 14:03 utc | 12

@9

Very true! I came to the same conclusion and have given a talk about it a few months ago (german: https://youtu.be/1lbRveqqbFw)

I am now trying to write about a new form of governance that utilizes the technological possibilities and gives power back to the people.

If you have deeper thoughts about it, i'ld be happy to hear from you.

One of my main theories i wanna elaborate on, is that it isnt even necessary any more for most laws to be valid universaly (on a territory).

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 14:04 utc | 13

Quality has disappeared in this once great country. We don’t produce much of anything of value or quality. So it reflects on the political officials who rule over us. It will never change because it benefits them. They only need us to vote them in and they just discard us until the next election cycle. It’s all a great big racket. Money rules and everything else is sold at a discount.

Posted by: Jose Garcia | Aug 8 2023 14:04 utc | 14

Representative democracy is inherently corrupt. The technology exists to ensure direct democracy and no one has enough currency to bribe half the population.

Posted by: David Kidger | Aug 8 2023 13:52 utc | 9

I agree that representative democracy is inherently corrupt. Unfortunately, direct democracy is far worse.

Posted by: Phil R | Aug 8 2023 14:09 utc | 15

What is all the money spent on ?
Its a financial arms race.

Most of the money is spent on media infuence, if you own the media you own the voter.
The media are a very small cartel of owners. They are there becouse they want to have that power and influence.
Its very effective but it certainy isnt democracy.
America is a post truth society, self-interest is the new religion.
All the rest is a puppet show.
---------
Anyone remember... Bilderberg

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 8 2023 14:26 utc | 16

@David Kidger | Aug 8 2023 13:52 utc | 9

no one has enough currency to bribe half the population.

Don't mean to nitpick. But the actual cost to bribe is much much less than a half of the population. In a western-style democracy (especially the amerikkkkan variety), one needs to consider (1) how many actually "vote" and (2) how much to win from the voting ones. Assuming 55% of the eligible voters vote and it takes 50.1% of those to win among two "candidates", it actually only needs 27.56% of the eligible votes to win. Note the 27.56% is the eligible voters, not the whole population.

In addition, the cost of bribing comes from the public's coffer most time. If it comes from "private" pockets, one can reasonably expect whoever coughs up $$$ up front will try to get it back plus interests afterwards.

The western-style democracy is a myth, if not a joke.

Posted by: LuRenJia | Aug 8 2023 14:46 utc | 17

It does not make any sense.

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 14:46 utc | 18

Meanwhile in Russia, all real political opponents are dead or in jail for 19 years.

Posted by: Jdjdjfjf | Aug 8 2023 14:46 utc | 19

@David Kidger | Aug 8 2023 13:52 utc | 9

Representative democracy is inherently corrupt. The technology exists to ensure direct democracy and no one has enough currency to bribe half the population.

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 14:50 utc | 20

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 14:04 utc | 13

I am now trying to write about a new form of governance that utilizes the technological possibilities and gives power back to the people.

If you have deeper thoughts about it, i'ld be happy to hear from you.

-----

I have thought about this for decades. I even had a website about it back in 2009. But, lately, I think the system is not simply broken; it is actively suppressing any attempts to reform it. Hence its more important to stop the lock-in of oligarchy than it is to try to implement a whole new system. I wrote about this change of mind in What is to be done.

For decades I have been thinking about a truly representative version of democracy and how to grow it organically within our political system. In a recent discussion about such ideas, it was pointed out to me that all this political theorizing is utterly irrelevant because, in the West, the formal political and governmental systems are completely corrupt. They do not accept any input contrary to Deep State plans to destroy the middle class, to heavily depopulate the world, and (delusionally) to takeover the planet. The bottom line is that peaceful change is unlikely...

The question, then, is not what is a good governmental system, but rather how do we get the current system's hands off our throats. This is a painful reframing for me.

------

If you are interested in my ideas about government, there is a link to it at the bottom of What is to be done. The archive link won't embed here at MoA, so glue together the pieces of the URL in your browser.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 14:56 utc | 21

OMG. This is Russian propaganda! According to the Jan. 6, 2017, U.S. intelligence report on Russian election interference:

The RT hosts asserted that the US two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a “sham.

RT aired a documentary about the Occupy Wall Street movement on 1, 2, and 4 November. RT framed the movement as a fight against "the ruling class" and described the current US political system as corrupt and dominated by corporations.

Posted by: WG | Aug 8 2023 14:57 utc | 22

You are not an Amerikastani and nor am I. To non Amerikastanis it makes zero difference which zionist appeasing corporate stooge war criminal inhabits the White Louse. They are all the same.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 8 2023 14:58 utc | 23

Big "D" Democracy has been a farce for as long as we have had it.

Look at the ascendant places around the world. They aren't democracies. They have monarchical or pseudo-monarchical rulers.

UAE, Russia, China.

Think about how much energy and money gets invested, particularly in America, in these too-frequent voting exercises. Energy and resources could be better deployed to increase standards of living and quality of life.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 14:59 utc | 24

I get where you are coming from but this is early going and about who qualifies to get on a debate on national TV. There aren't yet any 'voters,' rather they are campaigning to get them later in the primaries. So the metric is support in order not to have 100 people on the stage too many of whom don't have the faintest chance and are grandstanding.

Pence is a heavy institutional/RINO candidate so it makes sense that one way or another he makes the cut even though most MAGA people hate him more than they hate Pelosi or Biden. His candidacy makes sense to the GOP (Uniparty) Establishment as a spoiler to pull away support for Trump from the Christian right. It also might be viable if/when Trump is found guilty and the GOP remove him from their ticket, which is their prerogative as a private association. DeSantis is not a spoiler but a contender; if Trump is eliminated, he becomes a viable front runner immediately since his record as a governor is darn good.

Otherwise, they should all fold their tents. They won't though until the results of some of these lawsuits are known. And by waiting they are dooming the Republican Party to internecine strife in the meantime. And since the GOP also wants Trump to lose, they are fine with this.

The entire system is ghastly. This 'who gets to debate on national TV' is just one small beat therein!!

Posted by: Scorpion | Aug 8 2023 15:05 utc | 25

@19
You compare Russias success to the American preasent dismal failure on all levels !
Is that sarcasm perhaps.
Maybe your reading false western media naratives, if so neatly proving my comment @16
Possably your a troll of some shape or form.
Who knows, who cares.

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 8 2023 15:06 utc | 26

Thanks @jon brewster

I am not diverting in the urgency of the fight against the oligarchy.

Nevertheless we need something for the time after the struggle.

I think we need to offer a vision. Its all fine and honorable to fight against cbdcs, but if the only answer to it is "hold on to cash as long as you can" you gonna lose. We need a vision of how we can buy anonymly with digital money.

Same is true for almost everything. So we agree that all of our institutions are corrupted beyond rescue. Ok. What do we do when we get a window to change things?

We need something to fall back on. And it cant be "restore the old institutions".

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 15:11 utc | 27

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 14:04 utc | 13

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 14:56 utc | 21

#########

I find that most Utopians tend to overlook human nature and history.

There is a reason why these systems haven't worked, and why new systems may also face challenges. One didn't need a Ph.D. to know that Communism, as implemented by the USSR, had a short shelf life (and unsurprisingly, many Western Academics felt otherwise). It ran contrary to the way humans have been, and humans are designed.

I believe that any system that tries to further abstract democracy will continue to fail because the premise of mass participation is a deal breaker. Remember, approx. 50% of people are dumber than the average.

Let's not be in a big rush to collect their votes. As well as people who are easily manipulated emotionally.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 15:12 utc | 28

Welcome to the Oligarchical Federal System of the Outlaw US Empire where Big Money rules the roost and all three branches of the Federal Government. The 1787 Constitution was set up for that sort of system while at the state and local levels a semblance of small d democracy remains. So, b hits it on the head:

"Democracy can not die in such a system because it is simply not there."

The non-violent way out of this situation will only occur when the people cease following Establishment Narratives designed to divide so they can rule and establish solidarity of purpose to elect an insurgency of congressional reps and sens charged with the mission of dethroning Big Money. Yes, many will say that's impossible, but it's the only way if violent revolution with its chaos, destruction, and death is to be avoided.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 8 2023 15:16 utc | 29

You have outlined only one manifestation of the problems with the current system of elections in the United States. The supposed "political parties are actually corporations. There can be no democratic system when the two corporations (the RNC and DNC) have an income model based on donations and where these two corporations determine for whom the people can vote, who gets to debate, and who gets on the ballot.

There can be no honest "democratic" system as long as billionaire Wall Street, hedge funds, banks, real estate, and multinational corporations are able to donate unlimited millions to the campaigns of their chosen individuals. Where "dark money" in the millions can pour into the corporate coffers. There can be no honest "democratic" system when those same billionaires own the media and the media is so biased toward one party.

There can be no honest "democratic" system where the emphasis is on ballots, not votes, where election day lasts for weeks, which uses hackable voting machines, and where voter rolls have not been updated for years. Where states mail out ballots indiscriminately. Where people do not have to show an ID verifying their identity. Where signatures on ballots are not matched to the one on file. Where voting machines break down in some areas and not others. Where millions of people do not have to vote in person.

Posted by: Belle | Aug 8 2023 15:19 utc | 30

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 14:56 utc | 21

Thxs for your substack link and the 2021 'Democracy that works' paper from the Chinese govt. Will read through.

Alastair Crooke's recent piece reference by karlof1 here and on his substack further references a book by Christopher Rufo called America's Cultural Revolution which also suggests ways forward, though not in enough detail for my tastes. Basically the book attempts to paint an accurate historical picture of the neo-left in the US since the failures of pure communism in Russia and China and how it is threatening to create a totalitarian dystopia and instead calls for a return to 1776 ethos small-r republicanism. Karlof doesn't like this book and I haven't read any more than the introduction and conclusion but I think he gets the axis right.

The old left-right divide is no longer meaningful, nor are the political parties. What we have are forces of nihilism arrayed to diminish humanity, which he calls 'the revolution' and against them We the People need to develop a counter-revolution which can restore basic humanity and community. One can quibble over his history and such but I think this basic view is more or less correct. We need many more conversations about how to effect push-back / counter-revolution and also what a sane, simple social setup should look like. Most alternative press offers push-back or criticism mainly by debunking mainstream narrative but rarely do we find substantive discussions about what to do different and better.

And it's already too late for the US 2024 election which is off and doomed to be unhelpful unless either RFK Jr or DJT pull a magical rabbit out of their candidate hats. Some believe that Trump in Discovery will reveal the full fraud of the 2020 election all of which's shenanigans are known by his Space Force generals and the whole evil Empire will come tumbling down. But barring that sort of Deus-ex-Machina rescue, chances are that the Republic will keep stumbing into darkness with increasing levels of poverty and violence. Hopefully not, but until valid alternatives are discussed and then intentions formed to achieve them along with leaders standing forth to lead that charge, the trajectory is for negativity and nihilism to keep increasing, and ordinary common sense community life to keep being under siege and diminishing.

Posted by: Scorpion | Aug 8 2023 15:21 utc | 31

b writes: A state financed system based on the number of votes a candidate attracts would be in general more just.

I am afraid that justice is not the goal of the current political system. My favorite scheme for selecting out congrresscritters and executives (shared by no one I know) would be to select the representatives by a lottery among all citizens (elegible voters or whatever reasonable equivalent you choose). The selected representatives would select from their number a person to be president, and another for vice-president. The actual running of the country would depend on the civil service, which is what runs it anyway in spite of the ever increasing demented interference by the politicos. Some countries actually have a system to educate their politicians (maybe indoctrinate) as to some basic facts on the ground that would be helpful many of the screaming yahoos now in congress.

A good post. Americans live in an oligarcy.

Posted by: c | Aug 8 2023 15:25 utc | 32

I dont disagree. But since jon brewster seems to know arendt quite well i wanna give you one of her observations: the only resistence to the nazis came from parts of the churches. The leftists, communists and socialists alike were convinced that fascism was the last and inevitable stage of capitalism and it would therefore not make sence to fight it. They saw that fascism couldnt sustain and therefore concluded that it wouldnt make sence to resist it.

We are in a similar situation. Human nature will win out in the end. Still it may take 12 or 70 or 100 years. Digitization my speed up the collapse or freeze it down.

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 15:25 utc | 33

b - thanks for highlighting this aspect of it...

the system is broken.. anyone who examines it, will immediately conclude this... its a sham democracy at best and a bought and paid for oligarchy at its worst.. i tend to think the later..

Posted by: james | Aug 8 2023 15:25 utc | 34

To be blunt, any political system in which the people don't have a way to choose to vote on any political decision they wish cannot be considered a "democracy", not even a "semi-direct democracy" - which involves both possibility of referendum on most if not all government's and parliament's decisions and initiatives to let people vote in new laws or amendments. A strictly "representative" democracy is NOT a democracy but just another form of (Republican) oligarchy. US founders were quite aware of this, and willingly chose the oligarchic "Roman Republic" way.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Aug 8 2023 15:25 utc | 35

Posted by: Orgel | Aug 8 2023 15:11 utc | 27

Thanks @jon brewster

I am not diverting in the urgency of the fight against the oligarchy.

Nevertheless we need something for the time after the struggle.

-----

Yes. I think its a matter of emphasis. You are correct that "you can't beat a plan with no plan", and that the blob has a whole series of Shock Doctrine moves in the queue that we need to disrupt.

The reason for my shift is the fact that the internet, which used to seem like a neutral and powerful means of organizing, has been completely captured, turned into a surveillance and censorship machine. HowTF do you organize when all the tools at hand mutate into snakes that bite you?

We are only having this conversation because this blog isn't big enough or influential enough to stomp out. If we were a threat, they would cancel us instantly. Truth to be told, we are in the same boat as John Mearshiemer - a voice with a track record too strong to shut up as long as we don't rock the boat too hard.

That said, this has been a most welcome thread for me. The isolation of not having a forum to discuss how to organize is dispiriting. Thanks for encouraging me to think there are possibilities.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 15:39 utc | 36

Agreed, but I don't think we should use the word "donors" any more - perhaps "patrons," or bosses, or something. Campaign contributions are much less important than before. What is critical is that candidates the rich and powerful like get abundant and glowing press coverage, and candidates that the rich and powerful don't like will be either ignored completely or get only negative press. You didn't hear much press coverage in the last election about Biden's 50-year record of stabbing working class American's in the back, did you? Also, candidates that write legislation favoring the rich and powerful are rewarded with cushy jobs and book contracts and they and their relatives get on the board of directors of big companies etc.etc. - it is in fact bribery.

To my libertarian friends: letting the rich accumulate large fortunes and not regulating them in any way does not lead to utopia. The rich will use their power to game the system, to bribe and buy out the media and academia and other institutions so that only their chosen message is legitimate, they will bribe the legislators to write laws favoring themselves, they will gorge at the public trough on endless subsidies and bailouts, while demanding that government spending that actually helps middle class people be curtailed because deficits. They will involve us in endless foreign wars that impoverish our nation and are of no benefit to us. They will open the border to cheap foreign labor and eventually steal our own nation from us. In the great immigration time-out from 1940 to about 1965, America did great and with a limited - and valuable - labor supply wages were high, and yet CEO's of big companies did well, but they did not become billionaires. Sure we need incentive, but we don't need the rich to game the system and own everything and make the rest of us slaves for capitalism to function.

Posted by: TG | Aug 8 2023 15:39 utc | 37

Why are donors required at all? A state financed system based on the number of votes a candidate attracts would be in general more just.

Democrats propose such laws and Republicans vote them down because their conservative constituents don't want their tax dollars to fund political campaigns they disagree with. You can't make this up! The total lack of civic culture in America has been a project of the far right for over a century, because civics breeds Bolsheviks, it breeds members of the IWW, it invites all sorts of chaos - like walkable cities, public housing, and European style welfare states - when your average renter has as much political influence as your average petty or haute capitalist or homeowner!

The whole political structure of the US is rotten because it was written in the express interest of protecting propertied elites - slaveholders like Washington, merchants like Hancock, and holders of public securities, like 9/10 or so of the signers of the US constitution.

Posted by: fnord | Aug 8 2023 15:48 utc | 38

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 15:12 utc | 28

I believe that any system that tries to further abstract democracy will continue to fail because the premise of mass participation is a deal breaker. Remember, approx. 50% of people are dumber than the average.

Let's not be in a big rush to collect their votes. As well as people who are easily manipulated emotionally.
-----

First, just a question. What does a "further abstraction" of democracy look like? Its a vague reference.

As for people being dumb and emotionally manipulatable, I put that down to the way our democracy has been (dis) organized. We hear a lot about how the "deplorables" do all the work - keep the utilities working, deliver goods, etc. They aren't dumb as much as overloaded with work, terrified of falling into the underclass.

Ordinary people are quite capable of remembering stuff. Look at all the sad sacks who know the batting average of every player in the majors and all their other stats. Look at the players of fantasy football, who engage in the managerial behavior of picking team rosters. The problem is our "democracy" doesn't let people focus on what they know about and care passionately about.

With a third of a billion people in the US, direct democracy is ridiculous. But, if truck drivers could vote for representatives that wrote the laws about transportation, and those representatives could not vote on any other issue, or log-roll favors, then those who know about trucking would have a genuine vote. Multiply that by hundreds of sets of representatives and you have something resembling democracy. I call it "Political Division of Labor".

The current system is designed to create a gridlock that can only be unfrozen by massive amounts of bribery. We definitely need public financing based on signatures, instead of wealth primaries. The question is how to get there.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 15:51 utc | 39

Something I’ve been aware of for years.

This is theatre to pacify the masses.

They choose carefully vetted candidates then give people the choice of voting for 1 of those 2.

Anyone outside the accepted candidate list - those who do not toe the line or go off script - are given no publicity. Look at Rfk. Trump got round this by getting all the negative attention.

Even when elected there is no democracy.

I do not have the link for an interesting article but it showed no correlation between ordinary voters concerns and govt policies.

There was, however, a medium correlation with govt policies aligning with wealthy individuals and companies.

Posted by: HariS | Aug 8 2023 15:54 utc | 40

The elections have been stolen one way or another ever since 2000.
Democrat scumbag showrunners work the primaries and do whatever is necessary to get the desired outcome. They havent had enough juice to pull off HRC in the midst of numerous disclosures and right before your eyes discrepancies. Trump was the strategic hope of the Clintons concern over an empowered Jeb Bush candidacy, but Republican voters were like elephants and didnt forget the things they didnt like about the Bushes. They also like shiny TV stars with attitude and name recognition. Jeb was Blown! out of the water before putting on his skies. So they handed off their Steele Dossier and pee tape dirty tricks to their loyal opposition in the Clinton camp. Who put Trump in office with the relentless focus on Trump's scary name (just not as) while trying to disappear the Sanders menace by never mentioning the name of their actual opponent in a 3 person race for the soon to be stolen nomination. All of this while ignoring the dynamic of disappointment that might well have put Perot in office in 92. That wild card fell into Trumps hands because he was clearly not a Republican machine tool. The vile imperialist regime changes with extremely extra/prejudicial death sentences applied to leaders brought down by HRC and friends was a very weak spot for the support they expected from caged Democratic voters. More revelations how the cheating was planned and carried out, including something heinous yet undisclosed regarding the big state of California. She deserved to lose, and much more. Trump was too happy about the initial outcome to drive a stake in her. That was a mis stake. The primary processes, the debates being removed from the League of Women Voters, the legalization of unlimited, unidentified funds to do dirty work in the shadows, the destruction of FCC protections, ALL of these things were the handiwork of Bush and Clinton interests. It is far too late to appear shocked about any of it. The average older voter knows these things. They just dont get a chance to vote on them, or talk about them. Because the noose has been drawn this tight. All we have is what the PR bot systems tell us we have. That is the election and political reality we face. With the biggest, most dangerous war in history as a backdrop not even up for discussion, and an entire electorate under the influence of one giant hate machine. Free will and native intelligence is all we can hope for. What chance does it stand in a rigged game?

Posted by: Not Ewe | Aug 8 2023 15:54 utc | 41

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 15:51 utc | 39

#########

Let's say I have wealth, and that tax policy impacts me greatly. And I have a family, 3 kids. Let's say I vote.

And then 2 morons vote. The votes of a mouth breather carry just as much weight as a 1% genius.

That's my issue.

A further abstraction is more rules and processes. More technology. Fragility. Stuff that still avoids the issues inherent in human nature that have persisted as long as humans have been around. A system that doesn't reflect human nature, even at its best, will struggle to be profitable for humans. Remember, it's not about power or votes, or accuracy. It's about delivering a result for the constituents of the population, or as many of them as possible.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 15:58 utc | 42

That's just the half of it. Take a look at the election laws. They are developed by the two war/billionaire parties and make it almost impossible for a third party to emerge and participate in the process.

Democracy is impossible in such an economically polarized imperialist hellhole. It lives on in the hearts of working people but has been hollowed out to a set of procedures with no democratic content in practice. A big fake show, like everything else the RC in the US does.

As Hegel would say, the appearance is maintained, but the spirit has flown from every level of US government.

They think they're clever but this is actually a dangerous development for our elites.

An apt quote on the present situation:

By analogy with electrical engineering, democracy might be defined as a system of safety switches and circuit breakers for protection against currents overloaded by the national or social struggle. No period of human history has been—even remotely—so overcharged with antagonisms such as ours. … Under the impact of class and international contradictions that are too highly charged, the safety switches of democracy either burn out or explode. That is what the short circuit of dictatorship represents.

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 15:59 utc | 43

@Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 15:59 utc | 43

That's just the half of it. Take a look at the election laws. They are developed by the two war/billionaire parties and make it almost impossible for a third party to emerge and participate in the process.

The problem is the concept of political parties itself, it is a system that takes power away from citizens, it concentrates too much power in a few hands, donors or not.

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 16:06 utc | 44

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 16:06 utc | 44

Right. Let's just stick with these two war billionaire parties. Brilliant thoughts from Norway!

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 16:08 utc | 45

Right. Let's just stick with these two war billionaire parties. Brilliant thoughts from Norway!

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 16:08 utc | 45

We are not sticking with them. They are sticking it to us.
Victim blaming is not analysis, but it is a popular talking point.

Posted by: Not Ewe | Aug 8 2023 16:13 utc | 46

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 15:51 utc | 39

Let's say I have wealth, and that tax policy impacts me greatly. And I have a family, 3 kids. Let's say I vote.

And then 2 morons vote. The votes of a mouth breather carry just as much weight as a 1% genius.

That's my issue

---------

You are thinking inside the box. What is this completely abstract "tax policy" about? How is it broken down? Today, tax bills are omnibus nightmares marked up at 3 AM with carve-outs. You think that is OK?

Taxes are levied on specific items, unless you are talking about income taxes. For decades, they have been cutting the top tax bracket. No worries for rich geniuses there. Is income tax what your gripe is? Not much of a gripe if you are already rich.

In my scheme, people vote on what they have some knowledge of, choosing what topics (and only a few of those) to participate in. At that level of granularity, insults like mouthbreather are exposed for what they are - bigoted nonsense.

----

A further abstraction is more rules and processes. More technology. Fragility.

There is a fundamental concept in engineering: the system controller has to be more sophisticated than the system it is controlling. Government bureaucracy arose in reaction to the rise of corporate bureaucracy; and it took decades for the government to get momentary control of corporate behavior. Internet behemoths are the most technologically complex system ever built. Are you saying we are going to control that with raw "human nature"? No. To control these megalomaniacs, we need more organization - as you disparagingly refer to it, "more rules and processes". You want to bring a knife to a gunfight.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 16:14 utc | 47

u$$a democracy would impress both Stalin and hitler

Posted by: paddy | Aug 8 2023 16:16 utc | 48

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Aug 8 2023 14:58 utc | 23

It makes no difference to someone not emotionally capable of writing real names.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Aug 8 2023 16:24 utc | 49

@ Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 16:14 utc | 47

I think the guy you're trying to reason with has admitted pretty much outright they hold on to an unreasonable belief: the idea that a "1% genius" (I'm assuming they're referring to 99th percentile IQ test scorers - IQ-based pseudo-rationalism always rears its ugly head with these types) should have inherently more say in how society is run than any other member of it. Can you imagine the world we'd live in if the von Neumanns of the world had even more disproportionate influence and impact? We'd probably have started a nuclear war. Intelligent people are no more deserving of political influence than anyone else, and a concrete benefit of democracy is that the incomplete viewpoints of arrogant self-styled intellectuals are counteracted by the incomplete viewpoints of others - hopefully to the extent that the whole space is eventually covered by all perspectives, who all have an equal weight in discourse and in bringing matters to the attention of the demos.

Posted by: fnord | Aug 8 2023 16:24 utc | 50

@Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 16:08 utc | 45

Right. Let's just stick with these two war billionaire parties. Brilliant thoughts from Norway!

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 16:28 utc | 51

A wise Tibetan I knew decades ago recommended the following system:

At the bottom and as regards property: communism.
In the middle and as regards administration: democracy.
At the top and as regards overall leadership: monarchy.

There's something to it rather than endless one-system-fits-all ideologicals.

Posted by: Scorpion | Aug 8 2023 16:30 utc | 52

More proof of fraud still coming out in dribs and drabs:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/now-we-have-proof-tgp-exclusive-massive-2020/

Posted by: Scorpion | Aug 8 2023 16:31 utc | 53

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 13:36 utc | 1

Well, it’s the way things work in Europe. But I guess we are no one to you, since you are a proud citizen of the indispensable nation.

Could you please do me a favour? Before you talk about how elections should work, could you scrap the anglosaxon two party system and the quasi feudal presidential office? Just scrapping the holy constitution and going for a proportional parliamentary system would bring you well up to twentieth century standards in no time.

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Aug 8 2023 16:34 utc | 54

Do the voters deserve a better system? Most people just want to protect their own little patch, or imagine that"s what they're doing. Over the past few decades people have systematically voted away their rights to the benefit of corporations and their police and military forces. Fewer and fewer people vote.

Posted by: B. Wildered | Aug 8 2023 16:48 utc | 55

"Democracy dies in darkness", and the Washington Post is here to make sure it goes quickly!

Posted by: Peter VE | Aug 8 2023 16:49 utc | 56

I know exactly whats going to happen in America in the medium future.
No one on this thread has mentioned it, most not even considered it.
Is it my insignificant guise, no much much more than that.....
America has grown larger and by some tests more and more sucssefull.
Its now on the downward curve....

America is about to devide up, its to heavey, unwieldy and cumbersome. To fat. Its now a running joke world wide just like that Nuland charactor vistig niger.
Split the whole dam thing up, the residents could choose the politics of their chossen new nation, or move.
The entire world would breath a sigh of relief.
How do i know this will happen ?
Ask me.

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 8 2023 16:59 utc | 57

Do the voters deserve a better system? Most people just want to protect their own little patch, or imagine that"s what they're doing. Over the past few decades people have systematically voted away their rights to the benefit of corporations and their police and military forces. Fewer and fewer people vote.

Posted by: B. Wildered | Aug 8 2023 16:48 utc | 55

self voiding rationale. no need for comment.
On the other hand, the constant blaming of trapped, potential voters in the midst of absolute vote suppression on all levels, makes mockery of these blind assertions.
Assuming a voter gifted with measures of intelligence is going to do one thing or another, or that those with lesser marks are more inclined to swallow propaganda and other lies is quite damning.
You cannot back that up.
Might as well tell us what Putin is thinking. Same level of bullshit. I guess there is no objective measure of failure, only the success of the catapult as garbage swirls among those who dignify it with a response or huzzah.

Posted by: Not Ewe | Aug 8 2023 17:00 utc | 58

Socrates nailed the problem with democracy over 2500 years ago. The masses are too easily swayed by evil people. Nothing has changed.

I see no daylight at all. The people are ignorant and brainwashed and utterly incapable of defending themselves in any way. Our society, is broken and divided against itself. It appears that social chaos and anarchy is the best we can hope for, and a dystopian totalitarian corporate regime the worst.

Posted by: JustAMaverick | Aug 8 2023 17:03 utc | 59

Pence says the kinds of things that the RNC likes to hear, and he is likely to have lots of dirt of Trump, which could prove useful.

Of course, he was always going to qualify, just as the DNC changed its own rules to make sure that Kamala Harris qualified and Tulsi Gabbard did not.

Posted by: Feral Finster | Aug 8 2023 17:09 utc | 60

@Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 16:08 utc | 45
Right. Let's just stick with these two war billionaire parties. Brilliant thoughts from Norway!
The fact that I said your suggestion (3 parties) does not help clouded your vision and made you forget to take in my message: The problem are the parties themselves. 2, 3 or 5 makes no real difference.
Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 16:28 utc | 51

I agree with that, generally. You can have dozens of DSAs, greens, libertarians that are in the end stearing committees back to the two war/billionaire parties.

Nonetheless in a discussion of the state of democracy in the US, noting that the system denies access to any party outside duopoly of death is an important element of the discussion.

War and revolution are the gravest and most tragic phenomena in human history. You cannot joke with them. They do not tolerate dilettantism. We must understand no less clearly the interrelationship of the objective revolutionary factors, which cannot be induced at will, and the subjective factor of the revolution—the conscious vanguard of the proletariat, its party. It is necessary to prepare this party with the utmost energy.

In other words, there's no way to unseat this power outside of an organized party and a clear program and set of principles.

Lots of opinions on what should go into that program, but reviewing this site alone I can distill a few basic principles most would agree to:

Stripping the private owners of finance capital of all their wealth and returning it to the wage slaves who created it to use for the creation of a healthy society with a high standard of living and education.

Ending the war on Russia and China and all imperialist war and using those tremendous resources to rebuild the US for the benefit of those who work and live there.

Abolishing the intelligence apparatus of US imperialism and restoring basic democratic rights while adding critical economic rights.

Ensuring that all who can, work for the benefit of the Commonwealth.

I could go on, but you get the picture. Parties and their access to the public are important more now than ever.

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 17:13 utc | 61

>>Ordinary people are quite capable of remembering stuff. Look at all the sad sacks who know the batting average of every player in the majors and all their other stats. Look at the players of fantasy football, who engage in the managerial behavior of picking team rosters. The problem is our "democracy" doesn't let people focus on what they know about and care passionately about.<<
—JBrewster

The challenge is to teach folk how to "remember stuff" and how to "focus".
Fascism doesn’t operate on Memory and Focus. Folk are trained — college & work — not to think or feel.
Autism & avarice are rewarded.
Human kindness has been removed from experience and reward.

¿How do you spell, Failed 10,000-year Experiment.

Posted by: dfnslblty | Aug 8 2023 17:15 utc | 62

“Democracy can not die in such a system because it is simply not there.” ~b

Agreed. It all about the ism that trumps all the other isms, CAPITAL that is. USofA was created on genocide, for rich to park their money in, money that is earned on the back of slaves, and poor wage laborers.

Re voting: It is a feel good idea, making people believe they have a choice.
If you are not a member of Electoral College your vote simply does not count; or in the case of Y2K/W43, a member of SCOTUS (5-4 decision).
To call it a democracy is the height of hypocrisy.

Posted by: Sakineh Bagoom | Aug 8 2023 17:19 utc | 63

Well, yeah, not to mention that 99% of the voter base, should they choose to contribute a dime to any of these candidates, are throwing their money away, just like the time they would spend standing in line to vote, because every last one of the candidates, every time in a row, completely ignore them after their election and do whatever the big money tells them to.

Posted by: Josh | Aug 8 2023 17:21 utc | 64

@Ahenobarbus | Aug 8 2023 17:13 utc | 61

Those basic principles are all good, but I don't believe the system in the US is capable of real reform by juggling more parties. To be clear, I don't think we are capable over here either.

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 17:24 utc | 65

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 16:14 utc | 47

##########

The issue isn't an engineering one. It is social, spiritual, and moral. This is a human issue, not a mechanical (or process driven) one.

You're not going to get better politicians by expanding the voting franchise or introducing more technology into vote tabulation. The worst will find a way to rise to the top of any system over time.

You are thinking inside the box. What is this completely abstract "tax policy" about? How is it broken down? Today, tax bills are omnibus nightmares marked up at 3 AM with carve-outs. You think that is OK?

You're framing this is in a very American context. Taxes have been with us for a long time. Jesus was born in Jerusalem because his parents were in town to pay taxes. Now, a rational discussion may revolve around whether taxes have any legitimacy, and if they do, are there better ways to do it than it is being done now? Not the shenanigans that apathetic American citizens have allowed for decades.

I can't imagine any more "inside the box" thinking than maintaining mass participation with secret votes. If that is the starting point, nothing radical or substantive is likely to change. Consider if the votes were public, it would be very difficult to have fraud. And people would have to be socially accountable for which way they vote. No one will want to be the a-hole who voted for a demented Grandpa who starts wars and trashes the economy. Social pressure is an inherent feature of most safe and happy civilizations.

In my scheme, people vote on what they have some knowledge of, choosing what topics (and only a few of those) to participate in. At that level of granularity, insults like mouthbreather are exposed for what they are - bigoted nonsense.

Who decides who qualifies to vote? And who knows which people are voting with good intentions?

You don't like my saying "mouthbreather" but everyone knows what I was referring to. Not all people are equal. Not in height, strength, not in mental capacity, not in enthusiasm. Back to my issue. Everyone gets treated equally when it comes to voting. The malicious, the lazy, the incompetent, and the evil, the latter of which can be very intelligent people, but people of low character and people of high character each affect the outcome in broadly the same way. And that is not rational to me.

Now, if you sincerely believe all people are equal in most regards and have equal stakes, insight, intentions, capabilities, etc, then there is very little for us to discuss. I am not a Utopian. I *try* to be a realist.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 17:27 utc | 66

Jorgen Hassler @ 54

No idea which element of what system you might be referring to. In any case, how has that been working out for you recently? Europe has been producing good elected officials recently? I'd not noticed that. In any case Europe is largely governed from Washington.

I've long held the American system has large feudal hangovers. No one here even knows what I mean. Would have thought that you in Europe would have been the authorities on feudalsim. Which you've never left behind. I'll get rid of my Anglo-Saxon heritage when you kill your last aristocrat. Or even quit bowing to them.

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 17:30 utc | 67

@oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 17:30 utc | 67

I am guessing he meant the state financed system. It worked rather well in Sweden until the CIA murdered Olof Palme.

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 8 2023 17:34 utc | 68

The US electoral system in every state and every election is more corrupt than just the donation system but unfortunately for foreseeable future there would be no change unless a true popular grass root uprising to change the corrupt system .

Posted by: Kooshy | Aug 8 2023 17:36 utc | 69

The Democratic and Republican parties--really wings of the uniparty Property Party, as Gore Vidal so aptly observed--are both private corporations.

Those yammering about threats to and loss of democracy have no idea what they're talking about. What little democracy the US had clawed out of the 20th century was sold off decades ago.

Posted by: D | Aug 8 2023 17:36 utc | 70

I think the guy you're trying to reason with has admitted pretty much outright they hold on to an unreasonable belief: the idea that a "1% genius" (I'm assuming they're referring to 99th percentile IQ test scorers - IQ-based pseudo-rationalism always rears its ugly head with these types) should have inherently more say in how society is run than any other member of it. Can you imagine the world we'd live in if the von Neumanns of the world had even more disproportionate influence and impact? We'd probably have started a nuclear war. Intelligent people are no more deserving of political influence than anyone else, and a concrete benefit of democracy is that the incomplete viewpoints of arrogant self-styled intellectuals are counteracted by the incomplete viewpoints of others - hopefully to the extent that the whole space is eventually covered by all perspectives, who all have an equal weight in discourse and in bringing matters to the attention of the demos.

Posted by: fnord | Aug 8 2023 16:24 utc | 50

#############

I don't think my belief that dummies and clever people's votes get counted the exact same in a "democracy" is unreasonable.

Now if you don't believe in an intelligence spectrum, I can't say much about that. I think it is as obvious as some people are tall and some people are short. We're all different, in pretty much every domain. If you don't like that some people excel and others flounder, that's a concern you have with reality, not with my posting. It's not just humans, it's true in the animal kingdom as well.

I am pro-Monarchy. The intelligence of a monarch will rarely be the most intelligent person in the land. But it will be the person with the most at stake. That's something that gets lost a lot. Human problems are usually best solved by incentives. Right now, the West has leaders whose incentives are not the health and flourishing of their constituents. And we see the results of that. A monarch who was raised to protect the family name and the monarchy will be inclined to do the best possible job. The leader of Dubai walks in public without security. How can he do that?

How many high-level Western leaders can walk around in their country without security?

And isn't the true measure of a healthy body politic, a leader who is so respected that no one would think to harangue or assault them in public? If not for Western interference, how likely is it that Putin and Xi could also walk amongst the people with minimal security?

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 17:39 utc | 71

Of course, he was always going to qualify, just as the DNC changed its own rules to make sure that Kamala Harris qualified and Tulsi Gabbard did not.

Posted by: Feral Finster | Aug 8 2023 17:09 utc | 60
Perhaps there was a moment like that, but Tulsi demolished Kamala in a debate. To me, the year she was running was marking a transition from the era where democratic possibilities seemed to exist the the sad situation we see now. Manipulation of public opinion is historically always present in a democracy, in other systems (say, aristocratic supremacy) opinions of wide public do not matter much. Challenging the status quo requires ability to convince. The rules about signatures, donations etc. are relatively harmless compared to purges in the British Labour party. Overall, current rules of RNC are lenient because they do not need to fend off challengers to status quo.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 8 2023 17:46 utc | 72

Noregian @ 68

Sweden is a fiefdom of the Wallenbergs and election financing does not change that.

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 17:56 utc | 73

Démocratie ? ....Gracchus Babeuf

« Les gouvernants ne font des révolutions que pour gouverner.
Nous en voulons enfin une pour assurer à jamais le bonheur du peuple, par la vraie démocratie »

« Si le peuple est souverain, il doit exercer lui-même tout le plus qu'il peut de souveraineté »

Posted by: La Bastille | Aug 8 2023 17:59 utc | 74

LoveDonbass @ 71
First your use of the term air breathers in the way you do is. Digusting, worthy of Hitler facism.

Has it occoured to you that the elites almost deffinatly refer to you in those self same terms.
The less fortunate than you if you did but know is Americas best resource, a waisted resource. You write them off with a wave of the hand.
That is why America needs to split up.
Its waste and scounder top to bottem.
Your cup run over and spill.
Your trough of food tipped over and trapled in the mud.

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 8 2023 17:59 utc | 75

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 17:39 utc | 71

I am pro-Monarchy. The intelligence of a monarch will rarely be the most intelligent person in the land. But it will be the person with the most at stake. That's something that gets lost a lot.

Right, King Charles has the most at stake in the UK. Ha. Ha. He is nothing more than a billionaire parasite who spent the first 60 years of his life cutting ribbons. If they eliminated monarchy, he would go off to one of his estates and play golf. He has nothing at stake.

The royal family is falling apart. Harry and Megan - what a joke. Kate, the baby factory. They are entertainers, not leaders. The last time the royals made a policy difference was when Elizabeth trashed Australian democracy by firing Gough Whitlam.

After milllenia of kings and the wars and inequality they created, your statement is perilously close to flat-earther-ism

The leader of Dubai walks in public without security. How can he do that?

Your example is the king of Dubai? A nasty, theocratic dictatorship that sedates its population with oil money and imports slave labor Pakistanis by the planeload. Donne moi une break. A kinder, gentler version of Prince Bonesaw.

Even the Guardian blew the whistle on Dubai: We need slaves to build monuments

And isn't the true measure of a healthy body politic, a leader who is so respected that no one would think to harangue or assault them in public?

Respected, or feared? No one would harange Hitler or Stalin.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 18:00 utc | 76

Election ?

Just another serfdom

Serfs who occupied a plot of land were required to work for the lord of the manor who owned that land.

Posted by: La Bastille | Aug 8 2023 18:05 utc | 77

The US system is peculiar. And it always has been: a constant struggle between the popular instinct for democracy and the determination of the wealthy landowners and capitalists to fend it off.

Democracy, in any form, threatens property. Recognising that this is so is the basis of US Foreign Policy- it is written into the EU constitution; it is said by the Supreme Court to be the fundamental basis of the US constitution.

The truth is that something very like democracy has always been practised in human communities, where equality is a matter of common sense: tall poppies are soon to cut down and must be if those of normal size are to get their share of the sun.

Someone commented that every election since 2000 has been stolen. And this is true but only in the context that every election before 2000 was also stolen. And we all know this- from discrimination on the basis of race and sex and property to the active 'stealing' that the machines in the cities engaged in.

There really is no end to the ways in which elections in the US are corrupted- even getting on the ballot in a state can involve enormous expense of one sort or another. Then there is the vast size of the constituencies/districts which comes from dividing 330 million by 435. Then there are the discrepancies between the electorates of the states which mean that little more than a quarter of the population can, theoretically, equal the weight of the great majority in the Senate.

Then there is the matter of money and advertising- which means both that money rules and that, conversely, no amount of money suffices to buy equal time with the dominant oligarchy.

But perhaps most dangerous is the corruption that comes- as the prosecutors of Trump and Hunter Biden are obligingly demonstrating for us- from the state itself. The CIA and the FBI wield enormous power, quite independent of elected officials. The state has become a self perpetuating oligarchy: the wealthiest individuals are all contractors to the state, who in turn influence the choice of personnel running the state. And awarding contracts. And these interests dominate the media and the Academy and monopolise debate and discussion.

And then there is the corruption that involves the cancelation of all potential challenges to the structure: the invasion and disarming of Trade Unions and opposition parties, which is accompanied by 'dirty tricks' ranging from character assassination (cf Corbyn) to actual assassination, of which there has been and still are plenty of examples, including Ngo Dien Diem and a million members of the Indonesian Communist Party as well as Dr Kelly, Dag Hammarskjold, Olaf Palme and Count Bernadotte(just to choose the swedish ones).

Not to forget the shameless corruption that the DNC showed on the 2016 'counting out' of Bernie Sanders which led , in turn, to the emails on Wikileaks (everyone of which was genuine and remains uncontradicted), and the, still going strong, claims that the Kremlin was responsible for Hillary's defeat in 2016- the DNC, for those who have forgotten, claimed that it was an entirely private club which had every right in the world to fiddle its own elections. And the Court agreed.

So corrupt is the USA and so adept at corrupting elections are those who run the US that corrupting elections around the world has become a far more important instrument of US Foreign Policy than the Pentagon's legions. Nuland boasted that the US had spent over $5billion on corrupting Ukraine. And she of course was only talking of the tip of an iceberg, for Washington through the CIA or Radio Free Europe, has been spening tens of millions annually for decades poisoning democracy in eastern Europe. Every country in Europe without exception is ruled by a government which owes its power to the US (even Orban, rebellious though he may seem, represents a movement which Washington licensed because it is anti-communist). And that is only the beginning...

Perhaps I am unduly pessimistic but I see no way out of the grip that the capitalist oligarchy has over the United States government and its state apparatus short of military defeat and civil war. The ony alternative is a coup ridding us of the current ruling class, but here, alas, we run into the old conundrum to the effect that only countries without US Embassies can escape coups and the campaigns of interference and corruption that make them, in most countries, like Australia, Canada, the UK, Germany etc unneeded.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 8 2023 18:07 utc | 78

US system of elections is probably the worst in the world.
There are the well known issue: Money, media, abuse of court procedures, and that votes for states at the Electoral College don't reflect votes or population of the state.

There is also counting.
Most countries divide counting into small regions. So UK has 650 MPs and 650 counting groups. To cheat you'd need to switch say 20 MPs which means 20 counting groups.
In France the vote is counted in each of 577 constituencies with 5 or so constituencies making up a single Department. To cheat in France would mean fixing the vote by 10% or more in perhaps 100 constituencies to get a net 2% gain.
Point being that fixed vote counts either have to be very large and obvious or in so many places that someone will be a whistleblower.

The US is different. Firstly the college system means states almost all vote all or nothing.
As is well known 3 states went to Biden by 0.5%. Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin.
Had they gone to Trump the 306-232 Biden win would have been a 269-269 draw.
So votes in some states are much more critical than votes in others.

But US has 3009 counties. Every county reports independently its vote. 3009 counties implies an average vote of 50K in each county.
So lets look: Arizona
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Arizona#Results_by_county
3.40m votes in 15 counties of which 2.08m (62%) were in one county: Maricopa!!
(Maricopa is essentially the City of Phoenix plus a bit more)

Georgia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Georgia#Results_by_county
4.99m votes in 159 counties of which 1.70m (34%) are in just 4 counties: Fulton, Gwinnett, Cobb, DeKalb.
(Fulton is central, Atlanta, Gwinnet, Cobb and DeKalb are part of the Atlanta metropolitan area)

Wisconsin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Wisconsin#By_county
3.30m votes in 72 counties with 0.80m in 2 counties, Milwaukee and Dane.
(Milwaukee is the biggest city in Wisconsin followed by Madison which is Dane County)

Half a percent in Arizona is 17k votes or just 0.8% of the Maricopa vote.
But if needed (and perhaps it was!) 5% in Arizona is just 8% of the Maricopa vote.

Much the same applies in Georgia and Wisconsin.
No prizes for working out why there was so much debate over teh Maricopa and Fulton county vote counting!!!
Or why so much was asked about why the vote counting took so long when smaller counties had already declared their count.

And for non-Americans like me, the vote counting is managed by the County officials not the state officials, and big cities are always BLue even when the states are very very Red.

(There is actually an easy fix - 1. All counties to be divided into vote counting areas with a maximum of 100k votes. 2. All counties to delay the announcement of their count until a fixed time.

In a system like this who wouldn't cheat?

Posted by: Michael Droy | Aug 8 2023 18:07 utc | 79

On reviewing the most recent comments.
1/ It is a badge of ignorance and cowardice to equate Stalin with Hitler.

2/It is not the uneducated who threaten democracy but those who conceive themselves to be superior, which is an infallible sign of mental illness and moral turpitude

Posted by: bevin | Aug 8 2023 18:10 utc | 80

Please, I've posted ad nauseum on line. That plutocrat's and oligarchs in America will not allow anyone to come to the political forefront. Where the voters can elect into office. A candidate who will rock the establishments boat. The donor system in America is the vehicle used to ensure that proletariat supporting candidate never sees the light of day.

Posted by: JP | Aug 8 2023 18:16 utc | 81

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 17:27 utc | 66

Who decides who qualifies to vote? And who knows which people are voting with good intentions?

You don't like my saying "mouthbreather" but everyone knows what I was referring to. Not all people are equal. Not in height, strength, not in mental capacity, not in enthusiasm. Back to my issue. Everyone gets treated equally when it comes to voting. The malicious, the lazy, the incompetent, and the evil, the latter of which can be very intelligent people, but people of low character and people of high character each affect the outcome in broadly the same way. And that is not rational to me.

----
This is a classic canard. No one is saying people are equal or that they deserve equal outcomes. Democracy is about "equal justice under law", not equal outcomes. Laws enforcing quota systems, loyalty oaths, etc. are the antithesis of equal justice and should have been thrown out on their face. The fact they haven't been speaks to corruption, not mechanism.

Consider if the votes were public, it would be very difficult to have fraud. And people would have to be socially accountable for which way they vote.

Gee, you seemed to have missed how people in company towns used to have to ask for a ballot of one or another party in the voting place. People who didn't pick the company's party lost their job. They were accoutable alright - to their corporate masters.

You have a medieval take on the world.

Now, if you sincerely believe all people are equal in most regards and have equal stakes, insight, intentions, capabilities, etc, then there is very little for us to discuss. I am not a Utopian. I *try* to be a realist.,

Strawman argument. Not wasting my breath. A realist who wants monarchy and public voting? We are close to being done here.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 18:16 utc | 82

It's rather funny that the two systems deemed to be authoritarian--Russian and Chinese--are the more democratic since their conception of democracy is participation in governance--every citizen is a political actor, not just those elected as representatives. And that's the basic difference between West and East--the West's been ruled by Big Money since the Romans, while the East is ruled by the collective efforts of its citizens since the success of the Chinese and Vietnamese Revolutions and Russia's resurrection since 2000. Cuba might have provided another example if it hadn't been continually attacked by the Outlaw US Empire since its Revolution. Hopefully, additional examples will emerge as part of the Multipolar World.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 8 2023 18:17 utc | 83

"The primary function of government is to protect the minority of the rich from the majority of the poor." This is how James Madison, once President of the USA, described the parliamentary system of government in the United States.

"The primary function of government is to protect the minority of the rich from the majority of the poor." This is how James Madison, once President of the USA, described the parliamentary system of government in the United States.

Democracy (from the ancient Greek δημοκρατία dēmokratía popular rule) is a term for forms of governance based on the participation or sharing of all in the formation of political will.

Today, democracy is an alienated term. It is associated with justice, participation, etc.

The term democracy is used in POST antiquity as a camouflage for social systems that proclaim the opposite of the original meaning of the term.

Dr. Angela Merkel
https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/service/bulletin/rede-von-bundeskanzlerin-dr-angela-merkel-794788

"But that is precisely why I am also deeply convinced that it is right that we have a representative democracy and not a plebiscitary democracy and that representative democracy gives us the opportunity for certain periods of time to make decisions, then within these periods of time also to campaign for these decisions and thus to change opinions. Looking back at the history of the Federal Republic of Germany, we can say that all the major decisions did not have a demoscopic majority when they were taken. The introduction of the social market economy, rearmament, the treaties with the East, the NATO dual decision, the adherence to unity, the introduction of the euro and also the increasing assumption of responsibility by the Bundeswehr in the world - almost all these decisions were made against the majority of Germans. Only in retrospect did the attitude of the Germans change in many cases. I also think it is reasonable for the population to look at the result of a measure first and then form a judgement about it. I believe that this is an expression of the primacy of politics. And that should also be adhered to."

Democracy" in Germany is like a theatre without quality. Upstarts like Merkel do not speak of people, of voters, of clients.
She speaks of population. In the meantime, however, she has noticed that she herself is part of the population and not part of the power and that every Ukrainian fart can rebuke her accordingly. (Even in the "Servants of the People" she is not portrayed favourably).

Posted by: 600w | Aug 8 2023 18:19 utc | 84

But we have the right to "choose" our next "dictators". Direct Democracy, anything else is toilet material.

Posted by: Viktor | Aug 8 2023 18:21 utc | 85

First your use of the term air breathers in the way you do is. Digusting, worthy of Hitler facism.

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 8 2023 17:59 utc | 75

########

This comment made me laugh, thank you. It's "mouthbreathers" not "air breathers". I assume everyone is an air breather.

I do find it refreshing that people online conflate words with (sic) "Hitler facism". I'm not sure if that means I am on Hitler's level or if Hitler is on my level. Regardless, I will take it as the compliment it clearly was.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 18:22 utc | 86

Posted by: bevin | Aug 8 2023 18:10 utc | 80

1/ It is a badge of ignorance and cowardice to equate Stalin with Hitler.

---

A complete distortion of my statement. My statement was:

No one would harange Hitler or Stalin.

Do you object to the statement? Were they not both dictators. Did they not both send anyone who crossed them to prison or concentration camp/gulag?

Why are you inflating a seven word metaphor into a gaffe?

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 18:23 utc | 87

Only in America do they call this "donors" and many even defendthis system where power is literally for sale; right up and including the presidency
the rest of the world knows thie method, but calls it as it is: corruption.
when politicians are bought; they and/or the system is corropt.
it's not rocket science, people.

Posted by: valar morghulis | Aug 8 2023 18:25 utc | 88

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 18:00 utc | 76

#########

Do you have any idea how safe Dubai is to live in? I've never been but Western visitors regularly post videos of how they can leave their valuables unattended in public and come back hours later and no one has taken their stuff.

Now contrast that with NY, Chicago, or San Francisco, or London. Those are cities where one would be scared to walk down the street with a $500 watch. People in Dubai can wear watches worth $100k in public with no fear of being mugged. You call them theocratic, but I would argue that those theocrats observe morals with a lot more diligence than your elected representatives. You're worried about process and perception. I am more concerned with the results.

I do find it amusing that you cite the Guardian. It's almost like people in the bar talk about Western propaganda every day, until there is an article that supports their position. Then the Western "media" is a credible source. Today, people upload video from their phones that can tell us 1,000x more than any NYT or Guardian article. And it is interesting to me that we know the Guardian's takes on the Ukraine war are birdcage liner, but again, if it is for an argument we want to make, about a place we've never set eyes on, we'll believe it uncritically.

Fair play about the British monarchy, but it's not in charge and hasn't been for some time. Charles is a product of the same school of thinking that brought us "one man one vote" and other such nonsense. He's a liberal Western "Christian" whatever that means. He stands for nothing, he sacrifices nothing, he believes in nothing beyond himself. He's the perfect modern monarch. Lacking all of the martial and masculine qualities that Kings all throughout history have had to display to maintain their family's hold on the throne.

People care a lot more about how they are ruled than the mechanisms behind the results. It doesn't matter how much makeup one puts on democracy, it will always encourage bureaucracy (by having a weak executive) and corruption by having so many layers of abstraction between the constituent and the representative. Give me a safe and stable theocracy over a secular democracy with dangerous inner cities and rampant government corruption. It takes an ardent and committed atheist to reject Dubai for Chicago.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 18:38 utc | 89

I got my Burgum bucks! The virtual gift card came about 3 weeks after my $1 donation. I spent that $20 on food. I'm not obligated to do anything else, and because I live in an open primary state, I don't even have to choose a GOP ballot!

Posted by: Jon Lester | Aug 8 2023 18:46 utc | 90

john brewster@87

What you wrote was in relative terms, inoffensive. It put me in mind, though of those who would argue:

"Were they not both dictators? Did they not both send anyone who crossed them to prison or concentration camp/gulag?"

And I would answer 'No" to both questions. The history of the Soviet Union has been obscured by atrocity stories and, more recently, sub-Trotskyist critiques of "Stalinism" to the extent that it has become almost incomprehensible. The reality seems to me to be that the fate of the Revolution had been sealed by the time of Brest Litovsk, while the possibility of an international uprising rescuing it remains as alive today as it was in 1921.

In any case I regret having offended someone with whom I am generally in agreement.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 8 2023 18:48 utc | 91

Democracy is about "equal justice under law", not equal outcomes. Laws enforcing quota systems, loyalty oaths, etc. are the antithesis of equal justice and should have been thrown out on their face. The fact they haven't been speaks to corruption, not mechanism.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 18:16 utc | 82

#############

My friend, that's the marketing. That's not the decades (centuries) of results across different cultures and continents.

Is there equal justice under the law in America? Has there ever been?

You have a medieval take on the world.

Oaths are as old as time. Worship of God is as old as time. Taxes are as old as time. You can like them or dislike them, it doesn't change the way the world works. It's all as "medieval" as gravity and night-time.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 18:48 utc | 92

It's rather funny that the two systems deemed to be authoritarian--Russian and Chinese--are the more democratic since their conception of democracy is participation in governance--every citizen is a political actor, not just those elected as representatives. And that's the basic difference between West and East--the West's been ruled by Big Money since the Romans, while the East is ruled by the collective efforts of its citizens since the success of the Chinese and Vietnamese Revolutions and Russia's resurrection since 2000. Cuba might have provided another example if it hadn't been continually attacked by the Outlaw US Empire since its Revolution. Hopefully, additional examples will emerge as part of the Multipolar World.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 8 2023 18:17 utc | 83

#########

As usual, great points.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 18:51 utc | 93

Corruptocracy. It can never be fair. I wonder why do they bother with elections at all?

Posted by: whirlX | Aug 8 2023 13:45 utc | 8

Corruptocracy ... a very apt word ... they go through the bother because people have to have something to believe in, something they can feel warm and fuzzy about, and something they can use to attack the non-believers with.

Posted by: SattaMassaGana | Aug 8 2023 19:13 utc | 94

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 17:39 utc | 71

I am pro-Monarchy. The intelligence of a monarch will rarely be the most intelligent person in the land. But it will be the person with the most at stake.

========================================

That's a verboten view around here! But mainly because it is so tricky and multi-faceted. Just one aspect I was ruminating over yesterday:

Most monarch systems have some sort of primus inter pares principle in the mix. For example in feudal Europe a baron had a crown with six points, then an Earl had 8, a Duke had 10 and a King had 12. Each had power of life and death over subjects in their jurisdiction, just that a Duke had jurisdictions over the Earls and Barons, and the Kings had jurisdiction over them all, having the power to dispossess, exile or execute. The point being that they were peers in many things but then there was a final level of hierarchy on top with the monarch at the apex of that hierarchy.

Switching that thought slightly, one can imagine a council of ministers and generals - all Peers of the Realm like the King - but at the end of the session, be it for an hour or a month, a decision has to be made. Now either you can take votes and the majority has it, but then you have - by definition - a split decision, a split mind, a not-complete decision. However, if the final decision-making capacity resides in a single individual living being then it is a complete decision, warts an all, and the King, and therefore everyone else, moves forward living the consequences of that decision rather than perhaps having to revisit it again and again as the vote count changes.

So the function of having final decisions made by a single individual is one of the prime features of monarchy whose virtue and dynamic is rarely considered, nor the costs of rule by committees or endless checks and balances, each phase or aspect of which provides another opportunistic layer and level for the corruption of dissent or confusion to self-seed and grow.

All systems have to deal with keeping communication and authority lines well maintained between center and fringe, top and bottom. No system is perfect. All require well-intentioned, wise, virtuous human agency to function well, without which they will soon be overgrown with the weeds of corruption. There are no easy shortcuts.

Posted by: Scorpion | Aug 8 2023 19:29 utc | 95

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Aug 8 2023 18:38 utc | 89

Give me a safe and stable theocracy over a secular democracy...

We already know we completely disagree. So go your own way. But stop the misrepresentation.

----

Do you have any idea how safe Dubai is to live in?

Have you ever heard this quote?:

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

― Benjamin Franklin

You completely ignore the economics of the situation.

The economy of Dubai represents a per capita gross domestic product as of 2022 of US$46,665.

Today, Dubai has focused its economy on tourism by building hotels and developing real estate.

For a family of four, the income would be about $184,000 - which would put their average income into about the 5% bracket in the US. Money makes a lot of difference in society. When everyone is well off (except for the Pakistani slaves), there is no cause for theft or other crimes of passion or desperation. The whole place is like a clone of the City of London or Wall St. Their population is a mere 3.5 million. Their business is finance and real estate. They are the meeting center for Africa and other nearby areas.

In short, they are a most untypical, unrepresentative example of any kind of government. If they resemble a real country, it is Norway, who wisely invested their North Sea oil revenue into a sovereign wealth fund, allowing them to build up a diversified economy. Too bad Dubai invested its oil money in the FIRE sector - a brand new baby parasite state. They'll do fine screwing everyone else, just like Manhattan and London.

I do find it amusing that you cite the Guardian. It's almost like people in the bar talk about Western propaganda every day, until there is an article that supports their position.

Yeah, except the article I quoted was from 2008, long before the Snowden flap and the subborning of the Guardian by MI-5. The Guardian had a long history of being progressive until it was smashed.

----

We are definitely done here. Go play pretend king somewhere. I'm sure you will have fun.

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 19:34 utc | 96

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 8 2023 17:30 utc | 67 etc

Thanks for teaching me on how Europe works, and especially with regards Sweden, I only live here so I wouldn’t know.

It’s true that even bourgeois parliamentarism has been eroded over the the lady few decades, mainly by power transfers to international organisations the people you elected created and control.

And it’s also true that the neoliberal plauge spread by your elected officials have taken their toll on our welfare systems , but they still exist. We have more or less free healthcare, free education including university, affordable care for the elderly, affordable and functioning public transportation and a lot of other things you could only dream about. For the lower 70 percent any core European country offers better living than the US.

I know you live in the excremental nation, so you don’t believe me. But it’s a fact. Even the anglosaxon good twin (England) is paradise for a worker compared to the US.

You wonder why you live under oligarchs? Your constitution was written by slab owning oligarchs. If you manage to put those two sentences together you have the answer. If not the answer is: because you are stupid.

So, if you want change, no more hippie shit: organise, fight and be prepared to pay the price.

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Aug 8 2023 19:42 utc | 97

…slave owning…

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Aug 8 2023 19:44 utc | 98

Posted by: bevin | Aug 8 2023 18:48 utc | 91

In any case I regret having offended someone with whom I am generally in agreement...What you wrote was in relative terms, inoffensive.

----

Thanks. It is difficult to do nuance in the middle of a complicated pile of cross-posts. I appreciate the further information. I too have had trouble with clowns like Tim Snyder equating Naziism and Communism.

"Were they not both dictators? Did they not both send anyone who crossed them to prison or concentration camp/gulag?"



And I would answer 'No" to both questions. The history of the Soviet Union has been obscured by atrocity stories and, more recently, sub-Trotskyist critiques of "Stalinism" to the extent that it has become almost incomprehensible. The reality seems to me to be that the fate of the Revolution had been sealed by the time of Brest Litovsk, while the possibility of an international uprising rescuing it remains as alive today as it was in 1921.

I hear your assertions, but I'm having trouble using them to explain your two "no"s. I'm not criticizing, just trying to follow your reasoning. If the "fate of the Revolution" had been sealed early, how does that bear on how Stalin behaved?

I will grant that I have spent a lot of time trying to find an unbiased history about Stalin. Just about everything out there blackens his name. And with appointees like Lavrenti Beria, its not hard to do the blackening.

My take on Stalin is that, if not for him, we'd all be speaking German and killing Jews. Stalin educated the illiterate peasants, who became engineers and bureaucrats. He built up the industrial base for a decade, just in time to fight the Nazis. The 1939 non-aggression pact was more "buying tine". Then, in the first year of the war, he evacuated the entrire industrial base to the Urals. These are monumental feats that saved his country.

Yet people point to the Gulag, which had about the same ratio of prisoners to population as today's USA. Ugly yes, but unprecedented no. And Solzhenitsyn always was some kind of Christian/Monarchist apologist. (Enforced atheism was one of the biggest mistakes of the Soviet Union.) The whole Holodomor thing is Nazi propaganda.

Bottom line: I know the narrative about Stalin available to me is deeply flawed propaganda. But I can't find a book that I can trust on the subject. Any recommendations?

Posted by: john brewster | Aug 8 2023 19:56 utc | 99

I agree that representative democracy is inherently corrupt. Unfortunately, direct democracy is far worse.

Posted by: Phil R | Aug 8 2023 14:09 utc | 15
------------------------------------------------------
Explain your comment. Prove it please, your statement is just a big zero.

Posted by: Ed | Aug 8 2023 20:16 utc | 100