They're going to wait as long as they have to until they know MAS won't win.
And this is why we can't have nice things. Fucking hell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but socialist countries (leftist, ML, communist, whatever) can't be democratic. Its not that they don't want to be, its just that if they are, it will be corrupted by the rich until its no longer socialist. Thats why the successful socialist countries are authoritarian.
I hate that I believe that. Someone, PLEASE, change my view.
It’s still democratic. It’s just a people’s democratic dictatorship. The people’s needs are met, and their views listened to. But instead of giving the rich formal mechanisms and protection for political influence, they’re persecuted.
You can have plenty of democracy within a one party state, and a complete lack of it in a two party state.
The China chat on the discord really made me understand this. Like Cuba, for example, has democracy, on a local level. It's more democratic than the US. Debate is allowed, and most speech is free, except, to paraphrase Castro, speech that supports the US. All of this is within one political party. Now the US might have two parties, but we all know that, in reality, there's only one party; the bourgeois party. Dunno where I'm going with this, I'm pretty drunk.
And if you stray too far from accepted speech or accepted practices, you're ostracised or even persecuted as well.
I'm not a big fan of Chomsky, but I like this quote:
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”
They're going to wait as long as they have to until they know MAS won't win.
And this is why we can't have nice things. Fucking hell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but socialist countries (leftist, ML, communist, whatever) can't be democratic. Its not that they don't want to be, its just that if they are, it will be corrupted by the rich until its no longer socialist. Thats why the successful socialist countries are authoritarian.
I hate that I believe that. Someone, PLEASE, change my view.
It’s still democratic. It’s just a people’s democratic dictatorship. The people’s needs are met, and their views listened to. But instead of giving the rich formal mechanisms and protection for political influence, they’re persecuted.
You can have plenty of democracy within a one party state, and a complete lack of it in a two party state.
The China chat on the discord really made me understand this. Like Cuba, for example, has democracy, on a local level. It's more democratic than the US. Debate is allowed, and most speech is free, except, to paraphrase Castro, speech that supports the US. All of this is within one political party. Now the US might have two parties, but we all know that, in reality, there's only one party; the bourgeois party. Dunno where I'm going with this, I'm pretty drunk.
And if you stray too far from accepted speech or accepted practices, you're ostracised or even persecuted as well.
I'm not a big fan of Chomsky, but I like this quote:
I'm reminded of the adam curtis answer from the chapo interview
https://twitter.com/seanonlyskin/status/846486654344974337
deleted by creator