Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Giving up on your democratic representation is not going to make things better.



What democratic representation?

> “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”


Democracy doesn’t mean “every voter gets what they want,” it means every voter gets a fair opportunity to compromise with every other voter.

The primary thing that causes drift from fairness is lack of voter turnout.


This defeatist attitude is unhelpful. Are you prepared to lose nearly everything come November? What will you do when the dictatorship looms over you, will you accept your dwindling freedoms? What would cause you to actually stand up for yourself and fight for a better future? I see this attitude espoused a lot and I wonder if any of the people who say so will just roll over and accept a creeping totalitarianism with a shrug. Is there literally anything at all that you'd be proactive about?

If you have causes you are passionate about but you refuse to participate in the (hard won, bloodily won) civic right of voting, then your ability to affect those causes will evaporate. No matter how much you think your government doesn't care now, they will care even less when it is truly, wholly, dictatorially unaccountable to you. And then what? What was your anti-voting stance for?

A substantial chunk of the electorate seems to prefer losing and then whining about outcomes as long as it allows them to pat themselves on the back for 'staying above it all and seeing the futility all along'. I implore you instead to care, hold your officials accountable, and vote. A bad future is not inevitable.


Dictators can actually get something done for you, I'd prefer that to our current anarcho-tyranny.

"Francis's term "anarcho-tyranny" refers to armed dictatorship without rule of law, or a Hegelian synthesis when the state tyrannically or oppressively regulates citizens' lives yet is unable or unwilling to enforce fundamental protective law."


Can you describe precisely why you think the US meets this definition? Given that these terms are meaningful only in a relative sense, it’d be useful to hear your explanation as a comparison between e.g. Mexico, Somalia, Russia, or whatever other comparisons you find salient.

> Dictators can actually get something done for you, I'd prefer that to our current [x]

the historical track record of that sentiment is both plenty long and plenty awful. Are you ignorant of that history or dispute it or think it’ll be different this time or what?


Given that you chose to quote from a noted white supremacist scholar, it is likely fair to assume that you fall on the same side as the hypothetical impending dictatorship. In that case, sure, the dictatorship will get something done for you. Until of course the leopard comes to eat your face as well. Also in that case, I can see why you promote your narrative of helplessness, since it will hasten the arrival of your glorious new era.


Safe to say the guy advocating authoritarian rule can be completely dismissed.


Yeah that's what happens when over 40% of the voting public gives up like you. No representation.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: