Human Nature

[Ivan Denisovich]

I'm telling you that -I- use the term to describe what you're describing in that comment.

And I'm not describing so called human nature.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and a person talking about the "gato" isn't describing a cat. You made a predictive claim about what people were or weren't. I don't care what words we use for it - we're talking about the same thing.

[Ivan Denisovich]

-and a person talking about the "gato" isn't describing a cat. You made a predictive claim about what people were or weren't. I don't care what words we use for it - we're talking about the same thing.

You're free to live with your delusions I guess.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Of course not, in most cases. But they are tolerated even in the absence of elections, until a polity decides that "this is bullshit". I saw that exact thing happen in Iran in 1978, where an autocrat who was happy to kills thousands to preserve his power was all the same chucked out of office.

No government can survive when the body politic is fed up. Louis XVI, Tsar, Shah, the Soviet Union, all terrible regimes, all overthrown either by the people themselves or by a military that responded to public opinion.

If I recall correctly it was food that played big role in overthrowing Louis XVI and Tsar. It would indicate that people are willing to tolerate much as long as they're fed. Other than that I imagine populace reason for not standing up to tyranny are as varied as populaces itself.

Sure, but my point was, and is, that while they may not have voted for the Head Asshole in Charge, the people have power to take them down once this or that line is crossed. It's not about voting, it's about tolerating. And sooner or later any people will get sick of it.

One of the wiser lines in our American Declaration of Independence is "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". Whether that arises from a vote, or subservience and refusal to rise up, makes no difference. At some point or other the people will make their will known, by ballot or by bullet.

[Ivan Denisovich]

If I recall correctly it was food that played big role in overthrowing Louis XVI and Tsar. It would indicate that people are willing to tolerate much as long as they're fed. Other than that I imagine populace reason for not standing up to tyranny are as varied as populaces itself.

Sure, but my point was, and is, that while they may not have voted for the Head Asshole in Charge, the people have power to take them down once this or that line is crossed. It's not about voting, it's about tolerating. And sooner or later any people will get sick of it.

One of the wiser lines in our American Declaration of Independence is "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". Whether that arises from a vote, or subservience and refusal to rise up, makes no difference. At some point or other the people will make their will known, by ballot or by bullet.

Verily. As Boris Yeltsin said - You can build a throne of bayonets, but you can't sit on it for long.

[Alan V]

But in amongst humans at large are those who are not interested in working together and there are those who are prone to be destructive.

And when they have power and authority they can mislead a large number of the general public, exactly because so many ordinary people are so suggestible.  

They do this in large part by demonizing their opponents.  They pick your pockets while diverting your attention.

[Alan V]

That's what I see when people blame everything on one party, and refuse to accept criticism of the other.

Here is the problem with that kind of thinking in this case:

Republicans could have nominated a candidate who was much more qualified and much less dishonest in 2016, 2020, and especially in 2024 (considering Trump led an insurrection) -- just like Democrats did in those years. So comparing the two parties like that at this point is a false equivalence.

And by the way, Democrats do criticize other Democrats. Haven't you watched the debates before the primaries? They just don't lie about Democrats so much as Republicans do, and again especially as Trump does. He routinely calls us crooked Marxists and Communists and accuses us of stealing elections.

You must be way out of touch with American politics right now. All of your tut-tuting sounds silly in the face of our slide toward authoritarianism.

[Belacqua]

That's what I see when people blame everything on one party, and refuse to accept criticism of the other.

Here is the problem with that kind of thinking in this case:

Republicans could have nominated a candidate who was much more qualified and much less dishonest in 2016, 2020, and especially in 2024 (considering Trump led an insurrection) -- just like Democrats did in those years.  So comparing the two parties like that at this point is a false equivalence.

And by the way, Democrats do criticize other Democrats.  Haven't you watched the debates before the primaries?  They just don't lie about Democrats so much as Republicans do, and again especially as Trump does.  He routinely calls us crooked Marxists and Communists and accuses us of stealing elections.

You must be way out of touch with American politics right now.  All of your tut-tuting sounds silly in the face of our slide toward authoritarianism.

I am opposed to the slide toward authoritarianism.

It would be good to have an opposition party which effectively opposes the slide into authoritarianism.

Since the current opposition party is failing to prevent the slide into authoritarianism, I think it is permissible to discuss why they are failing and how they could do better.

You seem to think that we should wait until the crisis is past, and then discuss how to do a better job of opposing it. But by then it's too late.