myata

Putin, Kim and the bunch are the enemies of the free world. They said as much on countless occasions. Ignoring the obvious never solved these problems. Brutal, aggressive thugs won't just smile and go back to their swamps picking daisies. Then, if someone just couldn't get it, even itching, edging and twitching to help them would be a clear risk to the world's safety and security. The reality and reason can't be ignored.

Liar who regularly repeats enemy propaganda is more than just a liar. The cases are just too many. Can it be a coincidence?

Bring it on!.. where's the limit?

Actual de facto helpers of the worst aggressive dictator tyrants on the planet. No way of getting past and around it. A clear danger to the national security.

Maybe cows can fly. When reason and reality fly out the brain, what couldn't be possible, in it?

Between the law and brutal, abysmal lawlessness, is the there the right one? He doesn't know or he wouldn't tell. Trump refuses to say whether he wants Ukraine to win war against Russia. Look, in the times of WWII he would have said to want peace with the Axis, not defeating them. How could one read it any different? Echoing all the lying all of Putin's talking points, yet again, "negotiation" with a bandit, "peace" on his terms, "third war" - where is the line between self-serving carelessness and a clear and material assistance to the enemy? More than an empty-headed liar full of himself, playing into the hands of dictator thugs right at the time when a new axis of tyrants has been rising he is a clear risk and threat to security of America and the free world. How could one overlook and avoid this conclusion?

I'll make a rare exception in this case.. only small, insignificant jealous men lacking self-confidence spread and comment on gossip.

Strong, principled men support their partners in their choices and decisions. They also do not cower to liars, crooks and thugs of most despicable nature.

I'm not involved in alternative histories. Anyone can find all information at their fingertips and in the library, etc. What is indicative here though, is the desire to whitewash and redesign the history of the most brutal aggressive regimes in history of Europe at least: Germany, Nazi era. And Putin's, our time. The question is: why? What's in it, for the cult bunch? And the answer is quite obvious: the power. Bare, all of it, and nothing else. There's nothing here we didn't know, couldn't see and couldn't have known.

I honestly think it's not an obligation for popular figures to express their political sympathies, but rather an individual choice everyone should feel free to make according to their thoughts, position and values.

British system was created for completely different times and in them. There's no point in stretching it till at all possible, it's counterproductive, inefficient, and in the end, carries serious risks. If educated people are kept for little children, they would either disconnect from, or begin resenting the political system. And without active and involved citizens, democracy cannot endure. With all its problems, proportional system is the standard of the day of a modern democratic system. In the 21st century democracy, citizens have the right for a full, unrestricted choice, and for effective control over their governments.

Well based on my knowledge of history and basic common sense I choose to stay with the opinion that Hitler and his bunch were aggressive maniacs bent on world domination, not some poor misunderstood and hurt children. They didn't have to invade Czechoslovakia and Poland yet they chose too and it's a fact of history. There's undeniable documentary evidence of the rise of the world domination ideology under the Nazi regime I already said that I have no interest in alternate realities, histories, imaginations and such. For that reason it's unlikely that I would be able to spare any more attention to your posts, thanks for understanding.

He's also defeated all enemies exclusively by sucking up, cowering and running away from them. Where there are no limits of reality anymore, what isn't possible?

OK, good to know. It would take a separate topic to discuss that history in the detail it merits but note this: a boom, period factual (pseudo-, lying of course) statement with zero factual evidence, and contrary to it. Hitler had an overheated, militarized economy and the population. He and his circle have developed over a decade, an ideology of dominating the world. He had plans of conquest in the East and West. All that was only innocent kidding? He would have stopped in Poland and asked for nothing more? Just give bully what he wants and he'll never come back for more? Just because he said so? Believing that would be beyond dumb, but there may be intent here: an insidious revision of history to suit today's needs and agendas of the cult. And this is the cult as plain as it can be. Reality, facts, history are irrelevant. Its message of the moment is all that matters and tomorrow it will change on a whim. What can be added here, 1984 said it all.

There you go, apologists and helpers of modern Hitlers - de facto already, in the news, only "political adversaries". Hitlers are "political adversaries" except their political theses also just happen to include tanks and bombs. This isn't an aberration you see - it happens in the cults all the time. First of all, they want to remove and erase all and any principles and norms that form the basis of independent, individual thought and forming the position. Because without such, one can - and did, and have, history has all the facts on that, accept anything the cult and its Idol preaches. Even reprehensible and impossible previously. Even self-contradictory and all the way to total nuts. Can't deny it - this is exactly how it happened. "Political adversaries"? Sure. Let's have a discussion why it was wrong to confront Hitler in WWII and one should have been looking for compromises and "mutual cooperation" with him instead. Go ahead, waiting for sound arguments.

Because of the time! It's different, it has changed and moved on. People's lives today are nothing like they were in the 17th century but the political system is. Isn't it a paradox or what? With universal education in the first world, there's no point in isolating citizens from important decisions and choices and limiting their choices superficially. It creates polarization, resentment and disengagement. And a genuine democracy cannot keep going without genuine involvement of citizens. Not like there are no other reasons, but do they need such help from the formal arrangement of political system? And of course on the more general level, no system is perfect and nothing lasts forever, obvious truisms. Any entity, system, organism that doesn't know, forgot, lazy and bored etc to change and adapt itself to the reality of time will go extinct. No we can't beat the laws of nature, ourselves though any time and again.

The majority, first-by-the post parliamentary system was established in the 17th-18th centuries and may have been the only form of democracy possible at the time given the level of education and involvement of average, regular citizens. By now it's clear that it has run the course of its relevance and usability in the modern world of democracy. All remaining examples of its use in the modern world are in some kind of a trouble. In the third, semi-democracy world it is preferred to keep the power concentrated in the hands of rulers or elites due to obscurity and susceptibility to corruption. Of the three remaining instances in the first world, two: the U.S. and Canada are in some form of systemic crisis (U.S: extreme partisanship, Canada: detachment and disengagement of the population), while the United Kingdom, the place of its origin and long tradition can be considered a special and unique case, not without its problems as either. A hallmark of the system is that it isolates the access and control over the power from regular citizens to the maximum or extreme (U.S, Canada) extent. The role of the citizens, forget the great declarations and anthems, is limited only to voicing their opinion with no effect on the power decisions and participating in the democracy ritual to chose formal head from the selection reduced to the absolute minimum. It fosters partisanship, all the way to extreme, unproductive levels and shifts and confuses the priorities of the politics. The main objective of the duopoly is not competent, responsible and effective governance but gaining access to the power and holding it as long as possible. A meaningful, honest and responsible conversation about the state and priorities of the society is hardly possible in this environment. There's nothing wrong with political views and policies being focused and promoted by involved groups, political entities, parties and movements. What is ineffective and counterproductive is superficially reducing the meaningful choice the citizens can exercise to the absolute minimum. In the modern world it makes no, zero sense. Instead of competing with the best, politicians only have to beat their duopoly alter-ego and more often than not, not by superior vision and plan but by trying to put down and diminish them. And now, even objectivity and reality itself don't seem to matter. This erodes and rots both the quality of politics and involvement and trust of the citizens. The decline and eventual demise of democracy, if nothing changes, will follow inevitably. There's nothing prophetic about this conclusion: only logic and factual reality.

I can agree that genuine, meaningful and involved participation of citizens is needed for democracy to keep running, rather than some quick and superficial surrogates.

There are just too many factual episodes and coincidences to ignore so one can make some conclusions. First, we are dealing with a group that is entirely devoid of integrity, principles or even common sense inasmuch as it relates to friendly dealings with known ruthless and aggressive thugs. Next, there are no lines, moral or rational they couldn't and wouldn't cross only to enforce and prop up their egos and their agendas. This - dealing, rubbing noses and faces with modern incarnations of Hitler, pretending they're nothing out of ordinary, was the last of such lines. It is very easy to see too. And the question here is simple: should it become the new normal and standard of American politics from now and till who knows? Should all traditions, declarations and principles take off and fly away into the cold down of a new era? We can't avoided because in this case, as always in such cases, history will obtain her answer either way. There are no excuses or explanations, in such cases.

The cult is incapable of an intelligent discussion (forget, honest). At issue is not any particular individual, but a general, common sense question: can / should / how unsmart would it be to place any trust in a patent, verified prolific and compulsive liar? If a known liar promised you virtually unlimited riches in exchange for only a tiny bit of trust, should you trust him/her? Would it be smart or risk-free? We can give up our reason and intelligence, any time and any number of times. What we can't do though is avoiding the consequences of that choice. Good that we know.

Well the status quo is running into the wall. And the clearest symptom is the descent of all kinds of guru, idols and shamans. After all the attempts and trials, at times hard even desperate we're back to the drawing board again.

There's some truth to it, much time was lost in coasting, while the reality of life was changing at unprecedented pace. The place and involvement of citizens has to evolve with the reality of their lives not at the last resort possible and if the stars align. There's nothing wrong with the technology if it's serving the right purpose and the citizens are interested and involved. And in the opposite direction, we're bound to run into the old tried and trodden bread and circuses thing, it's only a matter of time, not if. There was an experiment with rats, where having learned to press the lever that released a dollop of sugar they couldn't stop doing that until it lost all sense and was doing them harm, still couldn't stop. Animals, who humans originated from evolved in a natural environment where scarcity was common and abundance, rare. Continuous, ongoing abundance of everything confuses and baffles them to the point where the entire system based on rational perception of the reality may fail. Look I have this button and if I need anything I'll just push it again and then, more. Is there a quicker way to extinction?

Many things were different back then. Conventions and traditions worked for example. The time has moved on and there's no turning it back. Modern democracies have to find ways to involve citizens in a responsible and meaningful participation in democratic governing or face a very real possibility of extinction. Because where a large segment of citizens have abandoned, or don't care about: reason; integrity; responsibility and accountability of their governments, democracy will part and no miracles could keep it in place. There are no such miracles. The price of a slide to circus democracy is its degradation and in the end, demise.

If citizens are not involved in the function of democracy regularly, routinely and meaningfully, they inevitably begin to see it a service, shop and/or entertainment and not as a matter of their direct and essential responsibility. This setting cannot last indefinitely. The progression goes from entertainment, to circus and on to some form of tyranny/dictatorship or oligarchy.

It cannot operate in the centuries old frame of dancing a democracy ritual once in so many years followed by complete detachment and delegation of all decisions to the enlightened ones. That creates the setting and platform for the entertainment, circus style politics with the inevitable downfall experienced countless times throughout the history. Except this time, it can be different because the dictators have worked out and perfected the technology of a permanent control over the society, that is not limited in time. It may only take one episode for the democracy to fall and remain a brief episode in the history of tyranny, suppression and control. North Korea, Iran, Russia, China you name it. It's no coincidence and neither, historical aberration. Change, adapt or perish: this is the one law of evolution. Modern democracies must find a way to keep the involvement of citizens at most or all times, in a responsible and reason-based process of coming to important and critical decisions. Or, they (may) will degrade and perish. Circus democracy is only a step away from the slip into tyranny. The lessons of history are very clear in this regard.