antmzo220

Based and SyHaNasrala pilled

Nobody will stop them?

And the United States

Why does it really matter that issues can be "discussed" if the issue being discussed is as atrocious as what Israel is doing to Palestine.

Israel and the US know that what they're doing is wrong. Them and their crony countries aren't going to change course because of this.

It doesn't exactly prevent WW2 if they tell Hitler to stop and he doesn't listen...unless of course they choose to let him continue his goals unimpeded rather than go to war, citing their documented disagreement as sufficient counter action...

Damn, those Russian "orc hordes armed with shovels" sure are tough!

My handshake brings all the boys to the yard.

So just accept your place in a broken system, got it. Just go support more increasingly right wing fascist policies and give up on any hope for Democracy.*

Pure strawman.

Pretty sure voting for a write in candidate/third party is, by definition, participating in the system.

You just accept the system is broken and undemocratic and believe others should accept this as well and give up.

You are more devoted to "order" than to justice; you prefer a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; you constantly say "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; you paternalistically believe you can set the timetable on progress and constantly advise the progressive to to wait for a "more convenient season".

You are the "white moderate" MLK warned of, as is the vast majority of the party, though not for long, as the party increasingly seeks the support of the right to avoid allowing any policy victory for the left.

You are increasingly the Republican party of Cheney, as demonstrated by, not only his support for the party, but by the party and Kamala herself touting the endorsement, rather than ignoring it/distancing themselves.

Alaska has a Republican Governor along with a Republican Majority in the house and Senate, they have no restrictions on abortion.

Does this mean the Republican party is pro-choice or that by voting Republican we can secure abortion rights? The answer is no.

Alaska, a red state, is reportedly trying to remove their rank choice voting. This isn't a "Dems" problem, it's a two party problem.

This is a counter to the Democratic party supporters you see everywhere who always get irrationally upset at third party voters, not about Republicans.

The point is, if the Democratic party never plan to address it, then how will it ever get done through voting Dem? The same goes for all the other issues people claim we should ignore in the name of "vote blue no matter who", including their genocide.

By competition and diploma.

What sort of competition and diploma?

Who do you compete with over what/in what way and who controls the competition/decides the winner? Is anything that influences this process political?

Does requiring that judges be elected remove requirements for diplomas? It definitely increases competition as you have to compete for the will of the people.

Why elect him on political bases?

Everything is political. The laws are determined by politics, every single person's interpretation of said laws is determined by politics.

A better question is, how does your system actually effectively remove politics from the process? Or does it simply shift the political aspect from the people themselves to another third party?

Why shouldn't the people themselves decide how they want the laws enforced in their own country? Who else should decide if not the people?

We do not elect an engineer on political criteria, we take the one who seems the best among the candidates.

Who determines which engineer seems the best off of what criteria? Is it political at all?

Example: engineer1 is great at building bridges but only alright at apartments, engineer2 is great at building apartments but bad at bridges.

The people of the city know the city requires more apartments but not more bridges.

Why should engineer1 get the job for simply being the "better engineer" when he doesn't fit the needs of the people?

What's the point to elect them?

Why shouldn't a judge serve and be accountable to the will of the people? Who knows better? Why?

And how is it not an authoritarian, anti-democratic, political opinion to state that someone does better know what the people need than the people?

So how would the judges be appointed under this system and why is it better than having them chosen from the people?

If the current system hasn't prevented political influence, then the method of choosing obviously isn't guaranteeing unbiased judges anyway, so what's the point in keeping it as opposed to elected judges?

Why not have elected judges and

Strong and diverse press, strong and enforced rules against politically motivated decisions.

?