Sorry, you obviously don't live in a totalitarian country.
Democracy is never ideal, it's always full of crooks, lies, hypocrisy. Especially when most people have more interesting things to do than participating in politics. But it's not even close to anything totalitarian. I've lived in both, and have the perspective.
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
The person above didn't claim that? It's just the difference between ideal democracy where the interests of most people are reflected in policy and US democracy (and most others, to different degrees) where choice is limited and corporate interests weigh much more heavy, it's hard to tell if it's closer to a more openly top-down form of government than it is from the ideal.
Yet the person above didn't get arrested and tortured for that comment. Or for a wrong "like" on Facebook. I'm not exaggerating, it really happens every day.
Try posting more than a short line of dismissive cynicism that can be interpreted any number of ways next time. And in the context of the comment you're replying to, "drawing an equivalence between totalitarianism and Western democracy (whether that's "democracy" or not)" is very much the common meaning.
If you intended to say something else with more nuance then you should have said something else with more nuance. I do my best to give the best possible interpretations to what people are saying, but don't expect people to bend over backwards to tease out a good faith interpretation of such brief and dismissive comments. You reap what you sow.
I'm still not sure what point your trying to make. Are you arguing that the US is a republic but not a democracy? That it's controlled by corporations and therefore shouldn't be called a democracy? That first past the post voting and the two party system prevent a "true" democracy from flourishing?
You made a very contrarian statement (totally fine!) but left all the work to figure out what you meant up to the reader. Your response is full of as hominem (ironically what you're complaining about), and it still doesn't explain anything about your position
The word “democracy” has a colloquial meaning that is used in common speech. In the U.S. we have a “democracy” as that term is used by most people. You sound like the people who say communism has never been tried.
I'd say he's illustrating the nuance intended by people who say communism has never been tried. On paper, both democracy and communism have been tried. In reality, both have been ham-strung by human greed, corruption, propaganda and good-old apathy.
In an academic setting where people are using precise terminology these nuances are worth debating and are important. But in a forum such as this one where it is clear what one means by “democracies” this is not appropriate. Clearly there is a distinction between Russia/China and the U.S./most of Europe in terms of freedom/elected representation where one side is called “democratic” and the other authoritarian. Pedantically quibbling over precise definitions is useless in this context.
Explain how you can have snowdens discussion and this thread in public? Doing the same critique of government policy in russia or china would get you disappeared real fast.
It's funny that you mention Snowden, a person who exposed a whole lot of anti-democratic stuff going on in his own country and became a widely celebrated patriotic hero for his courageous work. I guess the people guilty of anti-democratic behavior went to justice, while Snowden himself was offered protection and a well-deserved respectable position to continue his fight for human rights. Just like other notorious human-rights activists like Manning, Swartz or Assange.
> became a widely celebrated patriotic hero for his courageous work
When leaks happened, traditional opinion polls seemed to show a 1:1 split on support vs. disapproval. Online polls seemed to show a 2:1 split, favoring support.
One possibility: You are allowed to have such discussions because these will be ineffective and forgotten within half a day while bringing about zero policy change. Most of us around the world do not know how to bring about a change in policy. Intellectual exchanges over such forums are certainly not the way.
Increasingly, the word "democracy" seems like the word "terrorist" - both words have lost any distinct meaning they used to have, because of the way they have been abused in political rhetoric.
Re. your handle: did you snag it from the Borges short story?
Every time someone disagrees with laws passed by a democracy, this argument comes back.
Did you ever speak with someone out of tech about internet spying? I did, no normie gives a shit.
This is 100% the will of the people. Just take the L for what it is and accept that this is democracy working as intended.
