The Western IslesBoard

Rhenvaar wrote:

But why does it have to be like that? Politics isnt just black and white, as the Republicans and Democrats would describe it. Why no variations on the two sides of the issue?

IMO the problem is that the political parties (specifically party whips) have gotten so good at making politicians tow the party line (Just look at the impeachment trial where 51/53 Republicans voted against EVERY SINGLE WITNESS) that we aren't voting for specific politicians and their beliefs anymore (except president) we are instead voting for the party, i.e a vote for a republican senator is a vote for EVERY republican belief for better or worse and vice versa

Rhenvaar wrote:

How did it get like this though, where did the promise of American democracy go? The founding fathers would be turning in their graves to see this monstrosity we've become.

I think it started back during the Nixon Administration (some could argue it goes back as far as Kennedy or Eisenhower) but it got much worse when the Republican and Democratic Parties did a hot switch around the time Reagan became president. As far as my studies have shown, the political situation hasn't improved since Reagan

Good moaning

For another project off NS, I submitted the Doman language for a unique language to be used. I even did a full sentence for an example using the traditional script.

https://i.imgur.com/dKRXdpo.jpg it reads "This is how my language looks"

Domanania wrote:

For another project off NS, I submitted the Doman language for a unique language to be used. I even did a full sentence for an example using the traditional script.

https://i.imgur.com/dKRXdpo.jpg it reads "This is how my language looks"

It looks very interesting, but is it really organic? I hope you understand what do I mean.

Domanania wrote:

For another project off NS, I submitted the Doman language for a unique language to be used. I even did a full sentence for an example using the traditional script.

https://i.imgur.com/dKRXdpo.jpg it reads "This is how my language looks"

I only see dogs 🤔

Agadar wrote:

Ohayo!

That's Japanse for 'I'm a filthy weeb, please extinguish my bloodline'.

You are a f@cking weeb. You should be burned at the stake.

At least the other weeb here is a Nikkei Amerikajin.

Western therld wrote:

It looks very interesting, but is it really organic? I hope you understand what do I mean.

if it were actually written, more so than how im doing it. It borrows some script from Athara magarat as they conquered and colonized me three times. But this is traditional script, a latin alphabet is used more often. (i hope i understood what you meant)

Nhoor wrote:

That's a cute fuss that you've mood there!

Thanks Dad

Domanania wrote:

if it were actually written, more so than how im doing it. It borrows some script from Athara magarat as they conquered and colonized me three times. But this is traditional script, a latin alphabet is used more often. (i hope i understood what you meant)

Okey. That makes mors sense to me now. Anyway it's really great job in linguistics!

Rhenvaar wrote:

But why does it have to be like that? Politics isnt just black and white, as the Republicans and Democrats would describe it. Why no variations on the two sides of the issue?

Inertia - First Past the Post benefits the majority parties, so the majority parties have an interest in maintaining the system so that they continue to hold an uncontested majority. Individual districts, where popular conscience deviates enough from the national average, may elect third parties or independents to the legislature (though this is rather rare), but the larger the voting population gets the less likely this is to happen as parties that deviate from the average are, by definition, less likely to form a realistic opposition.

It would require a massive shift in popular political consciousness to change this - most likely, a mass voting-in of single issue candidates, such that they hold a majority, aiming to change the current voting system into one more representative (Proportional, Approval, Single Transferable, etc...). Given the general performance of single-issue candidates, I'm not holding my breath.

Electoral reform away from FPtP is something of a pipe-dream. I bring no hope, only disappointment.

Athara magarat wrote:

Three times the charm :)

page=dispatch/id=1101012

Thanks for reminding me this dispatch exists.

Thank you for this!

Linaviar wrote:

The central issue with both of these counterpoints is that the problem doesn't lie in any individual choices, but with the structure inherent in First Past the Post voting. It, by nature, results in a consolidation of parties, as any vote that doesn't realistically oppose the worst possible option is, mathematically, equivalent to a vote for the worst possible option (this applies both to votes for third parties and choosing not to vote). If your own views match up with the most realistic opposition, then great, otherwise you're shafted and need to vote for the lesser of two evils.

In order to realistically pursue a policy of voting for one's preferred candidate, rather than against a candidate that one strongly opposes, then the system needs to change to one that allows for more granularity (Which requires that the government, primarily occupied by the two major parties, both of which benefit from FPtP, initiates this agenda. Good Luck), or... emigrate to a place that already has such a system. If possible. And it's kind of fûcked up that the latter option is probably more attainable on an individual basis.

It might be how democracy should work, but it's certainly not how it works here. You vote against the opposition, or concede your vote to said opposition.

Living in MT, I know my vote doesn’t matter anywho.
Hence why I said it’s a statement vote.
Anyways, 100% agree. American “democracy” is really just an oligarchy