deleted by creator

The fact that you said those words tells me that you are at best morally confused and at worst an insect in human flesh.

Let me just say: respect. People like you restore my faith in humanity. Although I’m an atheist, I have an affinity for the teachings of Jesus. He wanted us to be the best versions of ourselves, and it upsets me to see his memory dragged through the muck of these for-profit cults.

After decades in the US, I’m yet to meet a real Christian. Folks pretending to be Christian all conveniently forget that the rich can’t enter the kingdom of heaven, that they should sell their possessions, feed the poor, heal the sick, and meekly turn the other cheek.

America has no Christians. Just cultists and charlatans.

True, I know we don’t disagree on the fundamentals. And you make a good point about how some governing bodies like the UN aren’t proportional in their representation. Although to be fair, the UN doesn’t levy taxes or directly interfere in the lives of citizens.

I suppose we could reform the US Senate to be more proportional by adding some seats so people living in populous states aren’t locked out of Federal decision-making.

Democracy is not binary. That is why democratic scholars consider the United States to be what’s called “a flawed democracy.”

And the Senate is one of those flaws.

The idea makes sense when you think of it as a federation of separate and equal units

That’s the problem. California and Wyoming are separate, but they are not equal! (Arguably they’re not even separate.) Wyoming has 1/40th the population. One person in Wyoming has the same voting power as 40 Californians to determine their own laws and taxes. That’s reminiscent of taxation without representation. For all practical purposes, the people of California have been disenfranchised by the US government.

Lastly, how Ireland, or Star Wars, or anyone else organizes their federal system has no bearing on whether the US Senate is in fact anti-democratic. 92% of the countries in the world are not full democracies.

If a federal government that levies taxes and enacts laws affecting individual citizens represents “states” in a manner disproportional to the population, the result is undemocratic.

This is a normative fact.

You can’t argue that giving some citizens hundreds of times the voting power over others is somehow democratic. Or is a person in California and Texas worth less than someone living in Alaska or Delaware? Why do they get less say in how they are taxed?

1 person, 1 vote.

The EU has a representative setup, which is democratic. Nothing like the US Senate, which is designed to rob people of representation.

Again, governments justify their existence by serving people, full stop, not arbitrary land masses. What’s next, a tertiary chamber of Congress for corporations?

The EU uses the ‘d’Hondt method’ which is a mathematical formula for proportional representation systems.

This is the opposite of the US senate.

It’s important to note that there’s no distinction between a democracy and a republic: a republic just is a type of (representative) democracy.

The United States is a republic, true, but there are aspects of our government that are undemocratic and vulnerable to corruption. The Senate is one of these aspects. The Supreme Court is another, so is the electoral college, and the influence of money, and the enormous power of the chief executive.

You’re so right. Thank you! I am doing my best. Thanks for your kind words.

deleted by creator

I’m in Austin, TX. I’ve lived on two continents, three countries, ten US states. This region of the world is by far the worst place I’ve ever lived… fellas, I lived in a third world country and Texas is worse. It’s dystopian. You can’t go outside. It’s 100 degrees half the year with high humidity. The air is dirty, polluted, full of allergens. People burn garbage everywhere. There is no wildlife. Trash in the street. Everything is dead, except a few biting insects, there’s no living creatures — not even birds. Dogs chained outside in the heat. Nature is dying, yellow and faded, except for the artificial grass — a rare sign of life (until the water runs out). Houston meanwhile is a gridlocked pile of parking lots and dirty overpasses built on a swamp, so whenever it rains it floods (which is comical — why does anyone live here?). Don’t come. There is no hope.

I moved to a red state. Absolutely awful. Don’t do it. Texas is an irremediable shit hole.

Democracy is a system of government whose power is vested by the people (“demos”). Notice that the Senate does not legislate on behalf of people. Instead, it represents the interests of arbitrary often unpopulated land masses. It is as stupid as it sounds and the exact opposite of democracy.

One of the main arguments by Senate proponents during the US founding was that democracy was unacceptable. “Government by the people for the people? What gives these people the right…” etcetera. If you want quotes I’ll dig them up, but that’s the vibe.

“Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. […]

No. In fact, two democracies have never gone to war with each other. Why would they?

Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes, and no man’s life or property will be secure." - John Adams (1807)

Ah, redistribution of wealth and moral progress, terrifying. In case it’s not obvious from these pathetic quotes, John Adams was a moron.

Don’t forget they were also terrified of democracy. The Senate is one of the most comically anti-democratic institutions ever concocted. Wyoming has as much power as California. I mean it beggars belief that anyone but a complete imbecile could agree to something like that.

Interestingly the US system was always more vulnerable to corruption, and everyone knew it. Our executive branch is far too powerful. That’s why when the US has engaged in nation building they never install governments like ours. Germany, Japan, Iraq, etc. the pentagon always insists on a parliamentary system, because they’re better in every way (less prone to grid lock, less prone to tyranny of the minority, weaker executive, etc.).

“Being given multiple opportunities.”

Damn, you’re actually nuts. Please get help for all our sakes.

I wouldn’t say that about sexual orientation because unlike gender, sexual orientation can’t be changed, as far as I know.

Philosophically there are two schools of thought. Either gender is arbitrary (1), or gender is not arbitrary (2). If the former, then people’s gender is entirely determined by their preferences, and it can change. If the latter, then there are factors outside of one’s preferences that determine their gender, which cannot change based on personal reflection.

Most people believe that gender can change (position 1). Ergo, my phrasing. Trans men are men. (And gender can change based on your preferences). I’ll freely admit I phrased my reply in a way intended to confuse and annoy you.

No offense but you’ve lost track of this conversation, and I don’t like playing word games. I feel like you’re pivoting to trans rights (???) despite the fact that we almost certainly agree.

A minute ago you were defending men’s rights. Now you want to have a philosophical discussion about the nature of gender? I’m happy to have that conversation, and I doubt we ultimately disagree, but why? What possible bearing does it have on our disagreement over whether “nobody cares about men’s issues?” When in fact as far as I can tell our entire society is organized to help young men succeed.