Opinions re: ANTIFA?

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
The thing is despite the founding fathers being against parties, they exist

And further they will always exist

So in that respect it's better if we could have many parties - this way no party could become too strong, as the electorate would always be split amongst smaller groups - thus creating a government with a higher degree of checks and balances

I feel like that would just cause greater division. I don't see it as a strength at all. Just my opinion.

Xzi · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
While I understand I disagree due to arguing instead of working towards the greater good of the country

What I'm saying is that ironically, a lot more parties would probably reduce the amount of bickering by a significant amount. If you've got 12-16 parties in the Senate and Congress as many countries do, you're going to be forced to learn to work together with a lot of different people who have viewpoints different from yours.

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

Xzi said:
What I'm saying is that ironically, a lot more parties would probably reduce the amount of bickering by a significant amount. If you've got 12-16 parties in the Senate and Congress as many countries do, you're going to be forced to learn to work together with a lot of different people who have viewpoints different from yours.

With so much division in parties I don't think there would be any working together.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
With so much division in parties I don't think there would be any working together.

thing is you literally create a situation where parties HAVE to work together when you have multiple parties

this is because no party could gain a majority, and thus coalition governments would have to be formed

Look at European democracies - coalitions are the norm. This makes it necessary that the ruling party hear the voices of smaller parties - as they need their support to pass any laws

Now contrast this with the US where there are only two parties - and they try to obstruct the other party as much as possible hoping to get a majority. This is what leads to years of lost progress and inaction in Washington.

Xzi · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
With so much division in parties I don't think there would be any working together.

Because we're divided right down the center at the moment. It's "us vs them." If you've got so many different parties, people are going to have to consider the similarities between them as well as the differences. They'd also have to do a bit more research on which party is most in line with their personal views and what all the parties stand for, so it would hopefully encourage more engagement with the entire political process. As opposed to the mostly-apathetic voter base the US has now.

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
thing is you literally create a situation where parties HAVE to work together when you have multiple parties

this is because no party could gain a majority, and thus coalition governments would have to be formed

Look at European democracies - coalitions are the norm. This makes it necessary that the ruling party hear the voices of smaller parties - as they need their support to pass any laws

Now contrast this with the US where there are only two parties - and they try to obstruct the other party as much as possible hoping to get a majority. This is what leads to years of lost progress and inaction in Washington.

It's just not my cup of tea. I really don't agree with the European thing because that's the very thing we walked away from when becoming Americans but to each their own. Everybody has a right to their own opinions. I believe in no parties.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
It's just not my cup of tea. I really don't agree with the European thing because that's the very thing we walked away from when becoming Americans but to each their own. Everybody has a right to their own opinions. I believe in no parties.

When this country became a republic we were arguably the only free nation in the world
You've got it wrong, european democracy is completely based on our system

thing is - they took what we had and moved forward

our form of government has barely changed since we created modern democracy over 200 years ago

They updated, and we didn't - but to be clear, when we walked away, we were walking away from monarchy

Xzi · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
It's just not my cup of tea. I really don't agree with the European thing because that's the very thing we walked away from when becoming Americans but to each their own. Everybody has a right to their own opinions. I believe in no parties.

We walked away from taxation without representation. With the two political parties together representative of only the half of the country which votes, we're pretty much back to that same situation in the US already. Having multiple political parties has nothing to do with being a Monarchy, plenty of Republics and Democracies the world over have the same.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

Xzi said:
We walked away from taxation without representation. With the two political parties together representative of only the half of the country which votes, we're pretty much back to that same situation in the US already. Having multiple political parties has nothing to do with being a Monarchy, plenty of Republics and Democracies the world over have the same.

Let's not forget DC, Puerto Rico and several other us territories are currently being taxed without representation

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
When this country became a republic we were arguably the only free nation in the world
You've got it wrong, european democracy is completely based on our system

thing is - they took what we had and moved forward

our form of government has barely changed since we created modern democracy over 200 years ago

They updated, and we didn't - but to be clear, when we walked away, we were walking away from monarchy

To each their own. I don't have much else to say about the matter. Haha.
You guys know where I stand. if Americans want to do that then so be it.

the_randomizer · Oct 18, 2018

Xzi said:
Because we're divided right down the center at the moment. It's "us vs them." If you've got so many different parties, people are going to have to consider the similarities between them as well as the differences. They'd also have to do a bit more research on which party is most in line with their personal views and what all the parties stand for, so it would hopefully encourage more engagement with the entire political process. As opposed to the mostly-apathetic voter base the US has now.

What irks me most about the party system, is that if I happen to voice an opinion, even if factually correct, people bitch and attack me for it. It's the entire reason why I abhor politics.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

the_randomizer said:
What irks me most about the party system, is that if I happen to voice an opinion, even if factually correct, people bitch and attack me for it. It's the entire reason why I abhor politics.

The party system resembles football more than democracy

the_randomizer · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
The party system resembles football more than democracy

No matter how much one voices opinions or beliefs, there just has to be someone who calls you out on it ad infinitum, telling you you're wrong, blah blah blah freaking blah. I'm
so bloody sick of it, why can't people just agree to disagree instead of trying to shove their beliefs down our tailpipes?

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
The party system resembles football more than democracy

By the way I forgot to mention that when I said about us leaving Europe I meant because of the monarchy. I'm saying I don't really like using Europe as an example for the USA.

Xzi · Oct 18, 2018

the_randomizer said:
What irks me most about the party system, is that if I happen to voice an opinion, even if factually correct, people bitch and attack me for it. It's the entire reason why I abhor politics.

Well, opinions are opinions and facts are facts, but I get where you're coming from. There are 'snowflakes' on both sides of the aisle that won't accept anything contrary to their pre-concieved biases on any given topic.

x65943 said:
The party system resembles football more than democracy

I wish, (US) football has 32 teams and equal spending caps across them all. That would be great for our political system.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

PanTheFaun said:
By the way I forgot to mention that when I said about us leaving Europe I meant because of the monarchy. I'm saying I don't really like using Europe as an example for the USA.

Here's what I think

Their system leads to less deadlock

Our system? Is there an advantage? Why not change some aspects if they aren't working?

As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't matter where an idea came from as long as it's sound. And there's no shame in amending things. You know that's why the founding fathers created a constitution that could be amended - and proceeded to amend it 10 times in quick succession.

And you know it's not just the Europeans, there have been many parties in US history too. It hasn't always been 2 party rule. There was a time when there was only 1 dominant party, and times when there were 3 or more. You know the Republican party was a relative newcomer when Lincoln won the presidency. Parties came and went for a long time. It's only more recently that the two parties passed restrictive rules to make it almost impossible for other parties to win elections. IMO this is very undemocratic.

PanTheFaun · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
Here's what I think

Their system leads to less deadlock

Our system? Is there an advantage? Why not change some aspects if they aren't working?

As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't matter where an idea came from as long as it's sound. And there's no shame in amending things. You know that's why the founding fathers created a constitution that could be amended - and proceeded to amend it 10 times in quick succession.

And you know it's not just the Europeans, there have been many parties in US history too. It hasn't always been 2 party rule. There was a time when there was only 1 dominant party, and times when there were 3 or more. You know the Republican party was a relative newcomer when Lincoln won the presidency. Parties came and went for a long time. It's only more recently that the two parties passed restrictive rules to make it almost impossible for other parties to win elections.

Like I have said if the mass populace of this country are in favor of this sort of system, that's fine. It's their right to do what they want to do. I will still hold my opinions while respecting everyone else's. c:

SG854 · Oct 18, 2018

x65943 said:
When this country became a republic we were arguably the only free nation in the world
You've got it wrong, european democracy is completely based on our system

thing is - they took what we had and moved forward

our form of government has barely changed since we created modern democracy over 200 years ago

They updated, and we didn't - but to be clear, when we walked away, we were walking away from monarchy

People do look up to our constitution and got inspiration from it. The Swedish, Japanese...

Individual liberty and freedoms is why we jumped from making 2 dollars a day to over 100.

x65943 said:
Here's what I think

Their system leads to less deadlock

Our system? Is there an advantage? Why not change some aspects if they aren't working?

As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't matter where an idea came from as long as it's sound. And there's no shame in amending things. You know that's why the founding fathers created a constitution that could be amended - and proceeded to amend it 10 times in quick succession.

And you know it's not just the Europeans, there have been many parties in US history too. It hasn't always been 2 party rule. There was a time when there was only 1 dominant party, and times when there were 3 or more. You know the Republican party was a relative newcomer when Lincoln won the presidency. Parties came and went for a long time. It's only more recently that the two parties passed restrictive rules to make it almost impossible for other parties to win elections. IMO this is very undemocratic.

The problem is misinformation or uniformed people making political decisions. I even caught politicians that are wrong. They just put out ideas that sound good on the surface but lead to negative consequences.

I do see people that claim to go by the facts only pay attention to facts that go by their preconceived notions, but are against facts that doesn’t line up with their beliefs. They pick and choose to which facts to follow, like how a religious person chooses which passages in a bible to follow and ignore negatives like they don’t exist.

the_randomizer · Oct 18, 2018

Here's my opinion, any and all extremist groups, should all be sterilized.

x65943 · Oct 18, 2018

the_randomizer said:
Here's my opinion, any and all extremist groups, should all be sterilized.

Like, they can still do whatever extremist stuff they want - but they have to have their balls chopped off?

Opinions re: ANTIFA?

The Uninspired Artist

Time to fly, 621

The Uninspired Artist

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

Time to fly, 621

The Uninspired Artist

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

Time to fly, 621

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

The Uninspired Artist

The Temp's official fox whisperer

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

The Temp's official fox whisperer

The Uninspired Artist

Time to fly, 621

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

The Uninspired Artist

Hail Mary

The Temp's official fox whisperer

i can be your sega dreamcast or sega nightmarecast

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum