3
4

What do you think of democracy? (self.altright)

SamsTestingAltCanadian Propertarian が 投稿

A big part of NRX and the Dark Enlightenment is criticism of democracy. Many neo-reactionaries think that we will be stuck in decline until we get rid of democracy.

I personally don't have any problem with democracy. I think that as long as most voters are productive members of society, democracy does fine. Problems occur when you create permanent underclasses that vote against the national interest. I suppose an anti-democrat would say this attitude is what got us into this mess.

全 25 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]diversity_is_racism 4ポイント5ポイント  (11子コメント)

It can never work, except to destroy civilization.

I think that as long as most voters are productive members of society, democracy does fine.

Democracy makes horrible decisions, or we would not be here today on the #altright.

[–]PMaDinaTuttar 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

If people had the choice of voting no or yat to multiculturalism this experiment would never have started. Mass immigration is an antidemocratic project forced on the people by elites.

[–]diversity_is_racism 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

If people had the choice of voting no or yat to multiculturalism this experiment would never have started.

They did have the choice over the many years we have had these policies. What was the Civil War, but a war for multicuturalism? And what did people do after that? What about integration of the armed forces, the Hart-Cellar act, or what happened at Little Rock?

Most voters supported it. They may be regretting it now, but let's not rewrite history.

[–]PMaDinaTuttar 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Every single party was fanatically pro multiculti. The entire media was entirely pro multiculti and dissidents had their homes attacked and were fired from jobs. Sure the population should've/could've revolted but the bottom line is the people weren't allowed to decide this.

[–]diversity_is_racism 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Every single party was fanatically pro multiculti.

That reflects the support of the voters. That is your problem.

Ten years ago, walking through your typical American suburb, you would find maybe one or two homes that were against multiculturalism. Out of, you know, 250 homes.

[–]PMaDinaTuttar 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

It didn't. The majority of people were against according to every poll. The parties just agreed that we would be multicultural. No debate, no election over night every single party simultaneously became pro mass immigration.

[–]diversity_is_racism 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

The majority of people were against according to every poll.

Polls are not votes.

You have a choice here:

  1. Democracy works: people said one thing, voted for another.

  2. Democracy does not work: people refused to vote out the leaders who put into place policies that they were against.

Either way, democracy produced these horrible results and needs to be overthrown.

[–]PMaDinaTuttar 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

If the elites had had complete power then nothing would have stopped them from opening the floodgates. The problem was the lack of democracy. A referendum in the 70s and we never would have had this situation, instead the elites decide for the people and they decided mass immigration.

[–]diversity_is_racism 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If the elites had had complete power then nothing would have stopped them from opening the floodgates.

That looks at the question backward. The elites had the support of the masses who kept voting them into power despite their support of multiculturalism.

The fact is, We The People wanted this. It sounded good at the time.

[–]SamsTestingAltCanadian Propertarian[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

America did okay from 1776 to 1965.

[–]diversity_is_racism 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Two disasters pro-Leftist world wars, social breakdown en masse in the 1920s, and a vapid consumer culture of the 1950s? Then as you noted, it culminates in self-destruction.

No, I do not think it did well at all.

[–]Labore_Et_Constantia 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

Universal democracy is degenerate.

Earned democracy I.e

Must have 100 iq/be over 25

Must earn at least min wage for 40 weeks per year

Families that stay together get 3 votes

If you commit a crime or cheat on your spouse you lose the right to vote

If you earn over 100k you get 2 votes

If you work in any money movement I.e stock trading/banking you don't get to vote

I could come up with more but In general more restrictions are better

[–]spiritoflIndbergh 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

I agree with you. Universal suffrage is nuts. In an ethno-state, only adults who are members of the nation's ruling ethnic group would be able to vote. I'm also very sympathetic to patriarchy and would consider denying the vote to women - solely because I think patriarchal societies are healthier for men, families, children, national defense, and the future of the white race.

[–]Labore_Et_Constantia 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah that's another good idea I forgot, pretty much if you do that, you can drop everything else as women vote overwhelmingly leftist (as most of them are natural socialists with little understand of property rights)

[–]emperorjoe 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would prefer we had any type of government other then democracy, with a personal preference on a republic,(with only select people being able to vote).

democracy in itself can most likely never work, it will be destroyed soon and be replaced by better types of government, everyone having a vote can work and is realistically only possible in white or Asian counties with high IQ people. it usually falls apart because of the representatives, as well as the creation of a welfare state where people vote to steal others wealth, and multitude of other reasons.

[–]-hbd 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

the ultimate problem with the democratic system is it turns individuals and groups against one another. politics is no longer about what is best for the nation, but rather what is best for the voter.

furthermore democratic leaders are often underqualified and concerned only with cooperating with the democratic nobility and bribing the foolish or disloyal masses to accumulate and maintain their status, power and wealth. they're no longer representatives of the people or nation, but rather of whoever's dishing out the dollars and handing in the ballots.

ironically, democracy creates complex and unorganised systems of bureaucracy wherein nobody is truly accountable. it's simply the fault of 'the system', thus creating less accountability and trust as their is nobody to turn to or blame.

[–][deleted] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'm fine with Democracy, but I don't think certain people should vote.

[–]citizen_beyond 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yes, if we're going to have democracy then certain people shouldn't have voting rights. About 90+% of them.

And before someone "against hate" copy-pastas this to show how evil we are, let me offer a brief explanation. Only people who have a vested ownership and long-term interest in the country should be allowed to vote. People subject to emotional appeals and short-term interests have never successfully been given political power in the history of the world.

And to those having their voting rights removed, I might say... "Which would you prefer? Having a vote in how you are governed, or being governed well?"

[–][deleted] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree. I think only people who have great knowledge of the country's political system, history, and interest in the country should vote. They must also be well assimilated to the country's cultures and traditions.

There are far too many voters who vote for a candidate with little knowledge of anything relating to politics. Many of them naively vote due to an emotional appeal a candidate may have made. Hell, some people even vote for no reason.

[–]EmeraldEagle88 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The chapter "50 Years of Failure" in George Lincoln Rockwell's White Power gives the most amazingly scathing criticism of Democracy I've ever read. And it's also the longest chapter in the book lol.

[–]skepgineer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

One simple modification would fix democracy: In order to vote, you have to pay more in taxes than you take in subsidies. This has to be a non-amendable non-negotiable part of the constitution. This was approximated in the US until 1828 by the property owner requirement. It would also prevent stuffing the ballot box with third world migrants.

[–]brookfang 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

A few huge problems I personally have with democracy are that there are many ways the scales can be tipped one way or the other. Examples include bringing in immigrants and lowering the voting age, both of which make liberals/democrats more likely to win the election regardless of what the people actually want. I also dislike the size of it, which leads to confusion and conspiracy, most of which is probably true due to the corruption and monetary influence.

[–]TrumpTrumpTrumpBigD 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Monarchy is the smallest of all governments. Everything since the French Revolution is bad politically. Largest governments are republics and democracies

[–]oldvannes 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Democracy is the worst possible form of government INCLUDING all the others.

European Civilization was built under Monarchy and a Church - and it should have stayed that way.

The USA, though European in origin, was built by plebians and peasants. The nobility stayed in Europe.

A limited form of Democratic rule, based upon property and heritage would suit our national character.

[–]QuanticWings 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think if your going to have a democracy the only people that should be allowed to vote are white men who are married, own land and have children. These are the only people who have a vested stake in seeing the country thrive. Women are too easy to emotionally manipulate.