How democracy really works... Source: imgur. You may have a fancy new we into this lake of , name an! Haw warts. And that's why it's up to him to convince the others to go first. faggot mudkipfuc
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (183)
[ 183 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #1 - markertemp
Reply +114 123456789123345869
(06/15/2013) [-]
And that's why it's up to him to convince the others to go first.
#159 to #1 - punnybutsofunny
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
they all should be bound by a rope to be as in democracy
User avatar #48 to #1 - sebthebrony
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
oh hai mark
#123 to #48 - anon id: fc79dc2f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Would this possibly be a reference to the room?
User avatar #172 to #123 - markertemp
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Maybe, but that and seb and I somewhat know one another.
#5 - merrymarvelite
Reply +111 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
How democracy in the US actually works.
User avatar #41 to #5 - I Am Monkey
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Somalia:
"Screw the rules! Nobody has money!
User avatar #11 to #5 - keiishiyama
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
It's so damn heartwrenching to know that you're right.
#51 - princessren
+9 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #126 to #51 - snowshark
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Or if you needed to pass some kind of criteria in order to vote, like in Starship Troopers, to stop the ignorant masses from even getting the choice to ruin the country with their slack-jawed nonsense.

Nice pic, btw.
#55 to #51 - zevran
Reply +40 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
#138 to #55 - software
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
we tried...
#139 to #138 - software
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
< but we made these
where did we go wrong norway
User avatar #149 to #139 - jonball
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
you need to set a +25% tax on everything and make ****** roads.
User avatar #178 to #139 - zevran
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
You need oil. Oil is essential.
#181 to #178 - software
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
we have north sea oil
User avatar #182 to #181 - zevran
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Yeah, but you're a net importer now. You don't export anything, so you don't earn anything from it.
#57 to #55 - weirdoo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
This guy
User avatar #151 to #55 - admiralen
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
>implying norwegians are well educated
User avatar #2 - crazyolitis
Reply +29 123456789123345869
(06/15/2013) [-]
Except most of us live in a democratic republic. Slightly different.
#4 to #2 - anon id: 75f321e7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/15/2013) [-]
very different. a straight democracy, people vote on everything, in a democratic republic, people vote on representatives to make the laws. true democracy is extremely in-efficient on a large scale as you have to count everybodies vote on every law you propose; and that comic is a perfect example of why Ancient Greece had political issues.
User avatar #6 to #4 - basicargentinian
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
actually in ancient greece only the citizens voted, and you had to have quite a few requirements to cualify as a citizen.
User avatar #12 to #6 - sorrowofdaedalus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Off of the top of my head:

Born in Greece.
Mother must be Grecian.
Must have served for three years in the Greek Military.
Must have had some form of classes in oration.


There are a lot of other qualifications too, so really the pool was a lot smaller than it sounds like. Not to mention, in times of particular crisis, you were able to vote in a dictator(ENTIRELY different connotation than what it means to most people today) to take charge of stuff.
User avatar #66 to #12 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Not to mention to vote you had to be male, probably had to have a certain degree of wealth or property, etc.
#117 to #66 - anon id: bf9d3596
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
"probably had to have a certain degree of wealth or property"
it sounds like youre assuming this, saying that kinda kills the whole idea of democracy.
you shouldnt state something like that unless you know it to be true. thats how rumors get started
User avatar #120 to #117 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
'Only adult male Athenian citizens who had completed their military training as ephebes had the right to vote in Athens.'

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Citizenship_in_Athens

The comment about wealth or property was an assumption. I'm not sure if it was the case in Athens and Ancient greece, but it was the case in other early democracies.
User avatar #121 to #120 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
And I just noticed you were speaking exclusively of the wealth/property comment. Sorry, I'm hurrdurring tonight.

I do believe the keyword was 'probably'. I was presuming it was the case.
User avatar #32 - I Am Monkey
Reply +27 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Funny how everyone thinks they're the guy in the middle.
User avatar #52 to #32 - bagguhsleep
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Not me. I don't even wear hats.
User avatar #60 to #52 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
And your avatar. Haha.
User avatar #39 to #32 - marsupilami
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
"A greater equality amongst men, is but a vain conceit of one's own wisdom, which almost all men think they have in a greater degree than the vulgar; that is, than all men but themselves, and a few others, whom by fame, or for concurring with themselves, they approve." - Thomas Hobbes
#40 to #39 - I Am Monkey
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
#8 - veryspecialagent
Reply -15 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
#9 to #8 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
#10 to #9 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Everyone has their problems.   
   
A good rule of thumb is, which problems cause the least damage to those around you.
Everyone has their problems.

A good rule of thumb is, which problems cause the least damage to those around you.
User avatar #110 to #8 - oxan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Reply limit.

>By the way, how is communism a democracy? If a perfect communist state where created, wouldn't you not have the choice of government? Because there is none.Either you live there or you don't.

"From the moment all members of society, or at least the vast majority, have learned to DJ 4DM1Nister the state themselves, have taken this work into their own hands, have organized control over the insignificant capitalist minority, over the gentry who wish to preserve their capitalist habits and over the workers who have been thoroughly corrupted by capitalism — from this moment the need for government of any kind begins to disappear altogether. The more complete the democracy, the nearer the moment when it becomes unnecessary. The more democratic the "state" which consists of the armed workers, and which is "no longer a state in the proper sense of the word", the more rapidly every form of state begins to wither away."

“... in capitalist society we have a democracy that is curtailed, wretched, false, a democracy only for the rich, for the minority. The dictatorship of the proletariat, the period of transition to communism, will for the first time create democracy for the people, for the majority, along with the necessary suppression of the exploiters, of the minority. Communism alone is capable of providing really complete democracy, and the more complete it is, the sooner it will become unnecessary and wither away of its own accord. ...”

It's democratic in the sense that the people are ruling themselves.
#112 to #110 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
gotcha, interesting
User avatar #17 to #8 - valeriya
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Congratulations you're either stupid or politically illiterate.
#177 to #17 - jewishcommienazi **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #62 to #17 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Haha, what's up valeriya?
#19 to #17 - veryspecialagent
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
seriously though, back up your claim or get the **** out. Why are you butthurt over socialism portrayal, but not the others?
User avatar #21 to #19 - valeriya
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Because people such as yourself are lumpen.
#18 to #17 - veryspecialagent
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Found the socialists
User avatar #20 to #18 - valeriya
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Allow me to educate you on how it would actually work, Firstly he would not be homeless plain and simple, in socialism the man who does not work does not eat, quite simply only when there is no work available will the government support you and even then if they offer you a job and refuse poof off to prison, because is a crime of social parasitism I think you'd call it in english.
#22 to #20 - veryspecialagent
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Sure but a huge part of socialism is to spread the wealth. If someone can't make money, the government uses the peoples' money (taxes) to help support that person. That's what the picture is illustrating, in a humorous way.

There are plenty of other aspects to the form of gov't, but that's the negative connotation of socialism, kind of like how censorship and oppression of the people is to communism, and ****** laws that only benefit corporations is for democracy. None of them are outright true, but there's still a semblance of truth underneath. It's called satire.
User avatar #23 to #22 - valeriya
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Allow me to explain, the spreading of wealth is more a part of the revolution then it is of socialism, think of to as the more you contribute you more you receive, the reason I am annoyed is quite simply because it's a fusion of entertainment and information and it is wrong, it oversimplifies things and breeds more idiots, also I'm pretty sure the system of government supporting people existed before socialism did. And I'm sorry but censorship and oppression do not exist under communism.
#25 to #23 - veryspecialagent
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Under the ideal communist government it wouldn't, but under ACTUAL com. governments it does almost always. China, Cuba and Russia for instance. Also your argument about false information goes both ways. Do you boast to know everything about democratic governments? Have you ever lived in one? The point is that in socialism, so much tax goes to supporting government run programs, that many socialist countries make only 40-55% of their actual wage? whereas democratic citizens get around 60-80%. I'm not saying that's better, but there's a huge difference, and that's all the cartoon is implying.
User avatar #27 to #25 - valeriya
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
To be you've just lost all right to ever say anything again, there is no state or governance or taxation in communism in the DoP maybe but in Communism the amount of times I've ever had to say this, and a just going to inform you that you should not compare a democratic system to a socialist system since socialism systems can be democratic, depending on the time, let's play the stupid comparisons game, I shall now compare the USSR to Nambia because it's a democratic state right. And to answer your question yes I live in a democratic country and I'm out now since I can't stand this anymore.
#28 to #27 - veryspecialagent
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
well something's getting lost in translation so I'll end this for tonight, but I feel like we're kind of arguing the same thing, we just don't understand each other. Because my democracy has a lot of socialist programs: Wellfare, social security, soon to be universal healthcare. And lots of socialist governments apply democratic thinking. But when you look at it prima facie, the stereotypes of the governments is what I was pointing out. And the reason those stereotypes are accepted, is because they are often, not always found in those governments.

If you still think I don't know what I'm talking about, maybe you don't know as much as you think you do either.
User avatar #29 to #28 - valeriya
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
At least I know the difference between socialism and communism.
#30 to #29 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I never once compared those two.
User avatar #54 to #30 - valeriya
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
No but you said a communist system is capable of oppression and censorship which is imply wrong, anyone who has a modicum of knowledge regarding socialism and communism would know there is no state in communism so you can not oppress, so you do not know the difference.
#70 to #54 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
So China has no government? Cuba isn't run by Fidel Castro? Stalin didn't strive to create a communist Russia? No matter what definition you give something, it doesn't matter what the definition is unless you follow it. Like the USA is referred to as a democracy, but it's really a democratic republic with some socialist leanings. Socialism in the world isn't what the textbook definition is, I'm sorry if that upsets you, but in the real world if you think socialism in it's pure form is how all socialist countries are run, then you're delusional.
User avatar #71 to #70 - valeriya
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Pst, heads up those are socialist systems you seem to be getting socialism and communism mixed up again.
#73 to #71 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
WOW, no they're not. They may seem more like socialist governments, but even China classifies their government as communist. Castro is more of a dictator BUT IT'S CLASSIFIED AS TOTALITARIAN COMMUNIST.
User avatar #75 to #73 - oxan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
>China classifies their government as communist

Source.

>BUT IT'S CLASSIFIED AS TOTALITARIAN COMMUNIST

And it's classified incorrectly, as 'totalitarian communism' is an oxymoron.
#87 to #75 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_China : the political branch, the Communist Party of China

It doesn't matter. That's the government they use to run their country, oxymoron or not. Go discuss it with them, not me.
User avatar #93 to #87 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
The name is irrelevant. The party governs a capitalist state and has no interest in communism. You know that the Tienanmen Square protests were for socialism and against market 'reforms', right?

But I think I understand what you're trying to say. The Bolshevik Party were communists, so their government was a 'communist government'. The state they were governing, though, was an_ infant_ 'socialist state', though. Do we agree?
User avatar #76 to #73 - valeriya
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
China is certainly the worst example to use, I mean honestly they're more authoritarian capitalist, using what they call "Socialism with chinese elements" as a guise for what they're doing, it's really quite simple when you hear someone say communist state they really mean socialist state, because communism does not have a state.
#83 to #76 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
You can't just say "that's a bad example" when that's the whole point of the comments I posted. You're just ooffended at a stereotype, but that was my point, all governments have stereotypes and prolems that go hand in hand. stop crying about it and acting like your is the only government that works and makes sense. It's just not the case.
User avatar #92 to #83 - valeriya
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
"the reason I am annoyed is quite simply because it's a fusion of entertainment and information and it is wrong"
User avatar #74 to #70 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
You're confusing socialism and communism. Stalin strived to bring about communism (not a communist Russia, but a communist world), but never achieved it. He never said he did.

Now, even though she is a Stalinist, calling her delusional is a bit much. Even Valeriya and I disagree on some things, but, as we are both communists, we don't disagree that socialism isn't communism and that communism has not yet been achieved.
User avatar #65 to #28 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
No, your democracy is a social democracy. The difference between a socialist state and a social democratic state is this:

Social democrats wish to retain the capitalist mode of production with socialistic reforms, such as welfare, and universal healthcare, etc. Socialists wish to bring about an entirely new mode of production - socialism.

#69 to #65 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
No it;s a democratic republic. And what a government strives to be and what a government is are two very different things. Yes the definition of communism is possibly to have no government, but in practice that's not at all how it is. AS I SAID take China, cuba for instance. Who censors them? THE COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT. no one is understanding there is a difference between textbook definitions and the real world. I don't know about you but I don't live in a textbook.
User avatar #72 to #69 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
It's a democratic republic, but a socialist state is a democratic republic. Your democratic republic, however, is a social democracy.

The definition of communism is a stateless, moneyless, classless society. Unless a society has met those conditions, you cannot say that 'in practice, it's this and that'.

>And what a government strives to be and what a government is are two very different things.

And in your example, for argument's sake, the Chinese government strives to be communist, but it is not communist. You dun goof'd there. Anyway, the Chinese government is no more communist/socialist than the DPRK is a democratic republic.

Now, I ask you to find me one instance in which any state has announced it has reached communism. Protip: you can't, because no state has reached communism because communism is stateless and has yet to be reached.

I think you'll find that textbooks are the ones talking about 'communist states', not actual communist literature.
#78 to #72 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Jesus ******* christ I swear you're both doing this on purpose, THAT"S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING. What do you mean I "dun goof'd"?! You just repeated what I've already said like 4 times. But still , If you're trying to become communist, you're still going to need a government to structure the country. What do all communist governments (not actually communist yet but what they're striving to become I have to ******* spell everything out for your tiny brains) have in common? They all devide money unfairly, oppress and censor their citizens. Prime example, ask anyone who the chinese tankman is, almost anyone can answer that, except for a chinese student, because China censors their internet severely (which is why google is pulling out of China). Is that clear enough for you?
User avatar #79 to #78 - oxan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
>Jesus ******* christ I swear you're both doing this on purpose
Valeriya's referring to you as lumpen, yeah - we're talking about it together (you should see FJ's politics board).

>What do you mean I "dun goof'd"?!
Your own argument that 'yes, communism is meant to be this, but in reality it's this' works against you.

>, If you're trying to become communist, you're still going to need a government to structure the country
Yeah - that period is called the dictatorship of the proletariat. It takes place during socialism. That's why it's a transitional stage.

>What do all communist governments (not actually communist yet but what they're striving to become I have to ******* spell everything out for your tiny brains) have in common?
You're making more sense there. A communist government makes sense - a government that is communist. However, a communist government isn't the same thing as a communist state. That's the issue here.

> ask anyone who the chinese tankman is
You realise that those protests were actually for socialism, and against the capitalist government? You realise that the socialist and communist rhetoric espoused by the CPC and the Chinese government means nothing, right?
#81 to #79 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Did you even look at the pictures I posted? Do you even know why Valeriya is debating me? I AM TALKING ABOUT GOVERNMENTS NOT STATES HOW CLEAR CAN I MAKE THIS?! I don't know how else to say it. The pictures I posted all represented common stereotypes for three main GOVERNMENTS, DEMOCRACY, COMMUNISM, AND SOCIALISM. I don't care what definition you pull off of google or wikipedia about what other people thinks it means, I'm talking real world examples, and all you stooges want to do is argue about literal definitions. IT HAS NO BEARING AND I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE SO STOP REPEATING ME AND YOURSELF PLEASE. Thank you.
#82 to #81 - valeriya
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
>Communism
>Government
#85 to #82 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
You're so ******* petty and stupid I don't want to talk to you anymore. You're like a ******* parrot, a one hit wonder. come up with something else to contribute, or **** off.
User avatar #86 to #85 - valeriya
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I'm curious there, have you ever read marx or any socialist literature, or do you "parrot" what the capitalists tell you about socialism.
#88 to #86 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I read some of marx for a world economics class a while back, but I didn't bother to devote a lot of it to memory. What do theories have to do with how a government is set up to run a country?
User avatar #91 to #88 - oxan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Soviet democracy. Workers' Councils, etc. Valeriya might give you something a little different, but keep in mind she's a Stalinist.
User avatar #89 to #81 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Communism is democratic, socialism is democratic. Democracy isn't an independent form of government - it is a characteristic of government.

The definitions Valeriya and I are using at actual communist definitions, not bourgeois definitions from a dictionary.

You're being extraordinarily ambiguous is what you've said. So we're talking exclusively of_ governments that are working to build communism_?
#95 to #89 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Sure you go ahead and talk about that, and I'll keep repeating myself that I'm talking about governments that are already classified as communist, and are doing nothing whatsoever to further actual communistic state goals. Or how France is socialist but not really, or how England and Canada are "socialist democracies". They're still socialist. USA and Mexico are still democratic. Whatever definition you want to put on those words, I don't care. At the end of the day, the countries are still going to be classified under one of those names, socialist, democratic, communist, or a dictatorship if you wanna throw another one in there too.
User avatar #97 to #95 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I'm trying to understand what you're talking about. So, you're talking about 'governments described as communist'. Now, those governments, especially today, are typically incorrectly described.

France, Britain and Canada are social democracies. They are capitalist countries with reforms. Socialist countries have entirely different economic systems that are not capitalist. Do you understand?
#100 to #97 - veryspecialagent
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Pretty much. What I was saying in the beginning, which is where I'm trying to keep the debate, is that most countries that have been labeled "communist" (whether correctly or not isn't important, stay with me here) have had a stigma that they, as a government, are oppressive, and they censor information coming into or leaving the country.

Socialism-based governments have the same problem, where others whom don't use that government system see socialism as a system that rewards those who sit on thier hands all day, by taking others hard-earned money and spreading the wealth. (As Valeriya said, it's a sterotype that doesn't quite tell the whole truth, but there us some truth to it).
And then of course democracy that has the stigma of giving favor to big companyies, and screwing over the citizens.
I understand this isn't how the world works, it's not that simple. But I also never said that all the cartoons were 100% ACCURATE 100% OF THE TIME. i WAS SIMPLY STATING THAT THAT IS HOW THESE GOV'TS ARE PORTRAYED BY OTHER GOV'TS.
User avatar #103 to #100 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I'm with you know.

Well, the summary of both Valeriya's and my views on the matter is that communism and socialism have both been the victim of immense slandering.

I'll end with this: states such as Norway and Sweden, and parties like the Democrats which are labeled socialist are done so incorrectly - they are social democratic. As communists, we see social democracy and the slandering of socialism and communism as perpetuating false consciousness. That is why I joined the thread, and likely why valeriya did so as well.
#109 to #103 - elburritoextremo
0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
#108 to #103 - veryspecialagent
0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Great.
By the way, how is communism a democracy? If a perfect communist state where created, wouldn't you not have the choice of government? Because there is none.Either you live there or you don't.

And I understand that social democracy is where many countries are at, but while they focus on full employment, wellfare, universal healthcare, etc... I really don't see USA and Mexico as reformist, because as far as they go towards social well-being, the market and economy are always pushed to be as free as possible, which makes it just as much of a free market democracy as a social democracy.
User avatar #64 to #25 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
This is entirely wrong.

Communism is stateless. Who's enforcing censorship?
User avatar #63 to #22 - oxan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Er, no. Socialism is the stage between capitalism and communism in which the proletariat have won the means of production for themselves and are beginning to construct the socialist mode of production on the road to communism.

We don't redistribute wealth, that's a bandaid solution. We create the condition in which redistribution of wealth is no longer necessary.
User avatar #43 to #22 - kyrill
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
not trying to butt in or take sides in this argument... but isn't "Sure but a huge part of socialism is to spread the wealth. If someone can't make money, the government uses the peoples' money (taxes) to help support that person. That's what the picture is illustrating, in a humorous way. " that pretty much welfare?
#3 - wroughten
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(06/15/2013) [-]
Thumbing this so comment #1 can hit the frontpage
User avatar #174 to #3 - markertemp
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Well, thank you.

My comment got top 100, I'm happy about that.
#31 - infinitereaper
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Democracy is crappy but a republic isn't much better, in fact, actually I'm starting to think that it doesn't matter what kind of system of government we come up with

we'll always find ways to **** it up.
User avatar #33 to #31 - asasqw
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Democracy like Communism works on a small scale very well. Republic and Socialism are both versions of the first two altered to work better on a larger scale. In the end nothing is without flaw.
User avatar #36 to #33 - infinitereaper
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I just wish people realized that the world is mostly like this regardless of political faction, if it wasn't for this ignorance, perhaps progress would be a little more... well actual progress.
User avatar #61 to #33 - oxan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Socialism is but a transitional period between capitalism and communism.
User avatar #13 - chillinwithbears
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
hot lava? can i have cold lava?
User avatar #14 to #13 - plainarcane **User deleted account**
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
That would be a pile of rocks.
User avatar #26 to #14 - Omegashenron
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I think thats what he's saying. It's like saying Im going to jump on this hot ice. It wouldnt be ice it would be water.
User avatar #37 - zaggystirdust
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I've come to realize that there is no perfect form of government
everyone's going to complain about it none-the-less
and people at that are on the top are always going to ruin it somehow
#59 to #37 - deathplayer
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #99 to #59 - toughactintinactin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Because humans are weak and easily corruptible. We are flawed beyond belief, what makes you think we can develop something perfect to govern us?
#176 to #99 - deathplayer
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#94 to #37 - anon id: 39c09ccf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
As a swede, I would say we are only halfway of what we could become if the politics were better.
User avatar #42 to #37 - Shramin
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
There are some governments that are better than others today though, the scandinavian nations are good example of a system that works incredibly well.

There are flaws don't get me wrong.
User avatar #68 to #42 - oxan
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Scandinavia relies on dem tasty natural resources.
User avatar #183 to #68 - Shramin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Norway certainly uses that to its advantage, lotsa oil.
User avatar #44 to #42 - zaggystirdust
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
and which would that be?
User avatar #45 to #44 - Shramin
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Which would what be? the flaws?
The once I know of are Schooling as well as the "Welfare" system is not as good as it could be.
User avatar #46 to #45 - zaggystirdust
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
I meant the form of government that Scandinavia has
User avatar #47 to #46 - Shramin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Oh
Socialist.
So... a mix of democratic and some other stuff?
User avatar #67 to #47 - oxan
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Social democracy*

Not socialist.
User avatar #50 to #47 - zaggystirdust
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
ah
thanks
User avatar #53 to #50 - jedawg
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/16/2013) [-]
Was that an, ah more communism, or an, ah maybe there's something more to it?