Should women have the right to vote?

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the 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.