What is this bullshit argument? If a lightbulb stops working after 10 years, is it as useless as a lightbulb that breaks after 10 minutes?
can’t be easily overturned
Did I write they have to be impossible to overturn? Why don’t you read what I write more carefully instead of reacting to some made up version of my comment.
So if monarchs would have succeeded in suppressing democracy until today (not very far fetched by the way), that would be proof of Democracy being a bad system?
There is no logic in their claim. It’s an absurd what if. Monarchies were unable to suppress democracies. It’s like saying “what if communism causes the sun to explode”. That would be bad, but it’s not reality.
PS: I guess I can also address the logic part notwithstanding the ridiculous assumption. Suppress by an external country is not the same as supporting a coup, which is exacerbating an internal problem. No system can withstand an overwhelming external force, but we need it to at least withstand covert agitation of internal issues. Because that is something that does happen in reality, between US, Russia, Iran, China, you have no lack of agitators. You won’t be able to exist in a bubble.
So just to be clear, there doesnt currently exist a political system that works, as they all have been overturned multiple times?
What is this bullshit argument? If a lightbulb stops working after 10 years, is it as useless as a lightbulb that breaks after 10 minutes?
Did I write they have to be impossible to overturn? Why don’t you read what I write more carefully instead of reacting to some made up version of my comment.
Your argument.
Why are you implying that real communism would be easily overturned? Its never been implemented.
This whole thread is about communism always collapsing into authoritarianism so quickly it is not even ever “really implemented”.
So if monarchs would have succeeded in suppressing democracy until today (not very far fetched by the way), that would be proof of Democracy being a bad system?
Think about what youre even saying.
Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension skills. I never wrote anything like that.
They’re using the logic you introduced in your claim to turn your claim on its head.
If you can’t recognize that, then who really has comprehension skill issues?
There is no logic in their claim. It’s an absurd what if. Monarchies were unable to suppress democracies. It’s like saying “what if communism causes the sun to explode”. That would be bad, but it’s not reality.
PS: I guess I can also address the logic part notwithstanding the ridiculous assumption. Suppress by an external country is not the same as supporting a coup, which is exacerbating an internal problem. No system can withstand an overwhelming external force, but we need it to at least withstand covert agitation of internal issues. Because that is something that does happen in reality, between US, Russia, Iran, China, you have no lack of agitators. You won’t be able to exist in a bubble.