all 20 comments

[–]somewherenear 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

No one should have the right to vote. What good has, "democracy" done for us? Why should I desire to live in a country led by dull and uninspired drones? I want a state with competent leaders that put the country and its Volk's interest at a forefront--even if I don't have an Individual say in it. The Nation and then Family above everyone and everything else. This doctrine will never and can never be guaranteed with a democracy.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Even if the leaders are competent, not being able to vote them out runs the risk of corruption and uncontrolled tyranny.

Take a man like Stalin for example. On an intellectual level, he wasn't dumb. And he still "cared" about his country just based on the fact he invested a lot in modernizing the Soviets. But with no real opposition, it also meant he was able to kill millions in the name of vanity projects with everyone in his inner circle unable to criticism him.

The only way I see we get perfect leadership with no flaws or risk of corruption is if the man in the charge was literally some kind of supercomputer that can predict failure. But this opens another can of worms, since the same A.I could make the Stalin-esque decisions under the guide of nation building.

[–]somewherenear 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It seems to me right now with our precious democracies, "corruption and uncontrolled tyranny" is rampant.

Stalin is not a good example because the Soviet system 'encouraged' corruption in many aspects. Their leadership made little attempts to combat it since they had no real loyalty to the Russian people. They served for personal interest, not for the betterment Russia. And also because a majority of the early 'elite' were jews. Sound familiar?

A better and more fine example would be National Socialist Germany. The NS created a highly monitored and controlled commission with the key goal of seeking out and eliminating corruption present on a large and national scale. Their attempts to thwart the ever present villainy, which had solidly taken root during the Weimar Republic were very successful. The Autobahn project for example was started in 1920, but not even a single stretch of road had been completed before 1933. Lots of it was due to incompetence and lack of proper discipline, however, corruption was the biggest reason. In 1941, when work ceased, just under 4,000 km/s of road had been built with nearly half a million men employed at any single point. An exceedingly impressive feat.

The previously mentioned committee paid close attention to the management of the project, and its impact is rather obvious. It should also be noted that it reported very little corruption even occurred to begin with. This is because the citizenry were enthusiastic and especially loyal to the regime. They knew the Nation cared for them, so they cared for it.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It seems to me right now with our precious democracies, "corruption and uncontrolled tyranny" is rampant.

But politicians still get rotated and shuffled out, as opposed to just letting the same person serve forever. We can also still hold these people responsible whether in power, or out of it. Of course, I never said democracy is perfect and there are definitely many prevailing issues. But between the choice of two evils, Democracy is at least a competitive idea that still requires Politicians to work for their position instead of automatically being rewarded for doing nothing or having great connections.

Stalin is not a good example because the Soviet system 'encouraged' corruption in many aspects. Their leadership made little attempts to combat it since they had no real loyalty to the Russian people. They served for personal interest, not for the betterment Russia. And also because a majority of the early 'elite' were jews. Sound familiar? A better and more fine example would be National Socialist Germany. The NS created a highly monitored and controlled commission with the key goal of seeking out and eliminating corruption present on a large and national scale. Their attempts to thwart the ever present villainy, which had solidly taken root during the Weimar Republic were very successful. The Autobahn project for example was started in 1920, but not even a single stretch of road had been completed before 1933. Lots of it was due to incompetence and lack of proper discipline, however, corruption was the biggest reason. In 1941, when work ceased, just under 4,000 km/s of road had been built with nearly half a million men employed at any single point. An exceedingly impressive feat. The previously mentioned committee paid close attention to the management of the project, and its impact is rather obvious. It should also be noted that it reported very little corruption even occurred to begin with. This is because the citizenry were enthusiastic and especially loyal to the regime. They knew the Nation cared for them, so they cared for it.

The Men who ran NS Germany still weren't perfect. Was it not Rudolf Hess, one of the highest ranking German officials at the time, made the ludicrous attempt at flying into enemy territory and immediately getting arrested for trespassing? Or how about the near the final days of the regime, there had been conspirators that wanted to take over German leadership by using any means necessary (i.e Claus von Stauffenberg) or those who simply felt like defecting rather than be held responsible (i.e Heinrich Himmler).

Asking for absolute loyalty in a huge population, when not even those in the high ranking inner circle can be trusted or even be expected to carry out their duties to the very ending, is a tall order. As I previously mentioned, only in a society that is perhaps influenced by Robots/A.I could we see such flawless ideals being proven to work without error.

Also in response to the Soviets having no loyalty to the Russian people, the Soviets WERE Russian Extremists. They committed hideous acts like starving the Ukrainian ethnic people, or expelling other European groups to settle them with Russians. By the end of the Cold War, it was basically Russia who was in a better position to lead vs all other ex-Soviet countries. Ironically, if it was a true Communist society, then the results should have been all of Eastern European being the same. But a las, this is once again the flaw of man made ideology.

Fascism/Communism/Democracy etc, all of them are still expected to fail or generate hardships at one point or another.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Should women be able to vote?

Absolutely not. Most men shouldn't be able to vote either.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPerdVEHGL3/

[–]lokke767 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Married women should have the right to vote. Women who are lost in life and refuse to fulfill their purpose shouldn't. The same thing applies to men by the way. Only men who fulfill their duty as providers and actively contribute to society by working and raising a family should have the right to vote. Putting it short, only people who have a stake in the future of society. That way we would weed out 90% of the degenerate elements and human detritus who make modern democracy the clown show it presently is.

[–]asterias 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In today climate, many degenerates are able to have a family because they are part of the system... at least in countries where employment is vastly controlled by the state.

[–]Richard_Parker 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I am not sure democracy at all is such a good idea. Maybe if you had something like starship troopers where right to vote is earned...

[–]jykylsin2034 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly

[–]Nombre27 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Only couples that are married with children and are net taxpayers should be allowed to vote.

A country is supposed to be a family, so by only allowing families to vote, they should vote in the interest of what's good for the family, which is something that would be held in common with the entire electorate in this hypothetical.

[–]TheWorldToCome 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

People shitting on voting itt, yet when you look at actual polls taken by white men in this country, if they actually just directly voted on issues they would vote pretty well IMO. Like even CA voted NOT to recognize gay marriage yet it was overruled by judges. I would trust direct voting of white men over any elected representative IMO

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    No they are coal burners

    [–]Sonofzeus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Right to vote should be earned.

    [–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Most men shouldn't have the right to vote. If you are going to have democracy then it is probably best to reserve the vote for men, preferable married men, to limit it. However, the dumb narrative I see from some that "women voting" is what has caused the current issues of society is nonsense.

    [–]Dashing-Dove 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    One vote per wed family household, and how the spouses jointly decide should be up to them. No children or home property? No vote. I don't believe forward-thinking policies are as important to people when they have no future generation to care about, meaning children of their own, and they'll have less stake in local conditions and governance when they can simply end a rental lease and move.

    Extended military service could be an alternative means of securing voting privilege, for people who are infertile or unwilling to have children, and don't own property for whatever reason. Committing 5+ years of one's life to the defense of a nation should be enough sacrifice.

    Also, no convicted felons or 1st generation immigrants should ever be able to vote. This would partially limit the destructive incentive of politicians to support widespread immigration and the release of criminal recidivists. A corollary to this would be the elimination of jus soli birthright citizenship, so those born to non-citizen parents would no longer have it automatically conferred.

    Lastly, voting should require a basic knowledge test on each candidate and ballot choice, to be designed as neutrally as possible, with bipartisan oversight and mutual agreement. Anyone who fails their test is denied the ballot. This will help to root out ignorant and lazy voters who have no business deciding any future but their own.

    [–]Bagarmoossen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    The concept of average people having a say on the direcion taken by society is retarded. Representative democracy is a nefarious system that should be abolished and all decisions should be taken exclusively by the more enlightened parcels of the population. Women shouldn't vote, and neither should average men.

    [–]cisheteroscumWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    No. Or "yes" if they are married with children. Also voting age for males raised to 30

    I'm not very pro-democracy anymore, I don't know why even normal people are. The typical citizen is just too dumb and miseducated on so many issues. Not sure if I have a great alternative - but it's clear that typical people constituting "America" are in no position to have a meaningful opinion on how we handle public resources

    [–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    If anybody votes, women should not. And only the cream of the crop of men should (above average IQ, has a house and a family, morally and legally in good standing, well-versed in political matters, if not more)

    [–]EngieBengie 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Generally speaking, I am fairly skeptical of democracy is all that good at producing outcomes given its kind of schizophrenic nature of flipping your vote for the other side when you're mad at the guy you voted for. It kind of makes people never commit to an actual direction with where they want to take their country. But I am not entirely convinced that we should get rid of it and basically throw the baby with the bath water. It is great to have a certain control over where your country can go but at the same time democracy often gives power to people who are too clueless and gullible that they would throw the country in a bad direction and then ask themselves why they are facing all kinds of shitty policies that they themselves have voted for. I would say a significant increase in the standards in qualification for who can and can't participate in it is warranted. I would say being employed, having a basic knowledge of economics and civics, being married, minimum 5 years of working to get some experience from the real world. I'd say that if we got these kinds of standards (regardless of whether or not it's realistic), we would have better outcomes for a white population. Taking away women's right to vote might not be all that necessary tbh. Would be hell to actually make this happen. I rather increase the qualifications other than "hurr durr, yoU'rE 18 oR OlDer, yOu CaN vOtE". That would give us better outcomes without the shitstorm produced from taking women's voting rights away. Just my more pragmatic approach to what we should do.

    [–]asterias 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I see that many believe that only married men with a family should have the right to vote. Such thinking takes no consideration of the actual societal conditions, at least in countries where the right to employment (and thus the right to get married and have children) is tightly controlled by the political system.