eyeball Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 Eyeball is making an absolutely terrible case for it, but a system which puts more of the decisions of government in the direct hands of voters via referendums makes sense to me. Obviously, some things need to be protected by a constitution which is much harder to change (i.e. rights), and other things need to be decided quickly and/or securely (i.e. military/foreign affairs matters), but there are many other decisions which can be placed in the hands of people. My position is no different than what you've just stated at all. You just don't want it used on the particular issue I'm making it around is all. In the meantime we can afford the time it takes to think about and vote on who our allies should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 I'm no fan of direct democracy save in fairly specific circumstances... How do you propose to avoid these triggering a chain reaction resulting in global dictatorship? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 How do you propose to avoid these triggering a chain reaction resulting in global dictatorship? I don't actually think such a thing is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 (edited) In the meantime we can afford the time it takes to think about and vote on who our allies should be. That's simple, whoever can best help us if we are attacked. As Churchill famously said of the British alliance with Stalin "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Edited August 21, 2010 by ToadBrother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 That's simple, whoever can best help us if we are attacked. As Churchill famously said of the British alliance with Stalin "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Be fair don't confuse the eyeball with the logic of Mr. Churchill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted August 21, 2010 Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 That's simple, whoever can best help us if we are attacked. As Churchill famously said of the British alliance with Stalin "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Stop that immediately!!!! If Lictor reads this,and he might show up under his many pseudonyms,he's going to tell us all what a tragic and horrible mistake it was that the Allies sided with Stalin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted August 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2010 If Lictor reads this,and he might show up under his many pseudonyms,he's going to tell us all what a tragic and horrible mistake it was that the Allies sided with Stalin...The mistake wasn't in siding with Stalin temporarily. The mistake was giving him anything more than the U.S.S.R.'s continued independence. There was no reason other than Roosvelt's addled brain to throw Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary etc. under the bus. Maybe Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were beyond salvation in that they were occupied early on and even since their new independence have not been a model of stability (though I still want them to stay independent). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.