China shows its true colours – and they're not pretty (opens in new tab)

The key difference between China and the rest of the elective systems is: do they even consider voting as a positive feedback loop?

As long as we dont convince (and as a "small" city, we cant force, only convince) them that it s in their own interest to let us support, or midly criticize them by voting, they'll go backward and decide for us. And they may not even take bad decisions, just remove ownership from the local population which for me is key to buy into the policies.

Most democracies manage well the dance between "we ll only propose policies that make sense" and "people can vote freely". We have to learn that too.

I agree to some extent (bit sad since I got the right to vote in HK just this year and bleh) but I cant argue against the principle they put forth on the face of it: yes only patriot should ever be elected, yes calling for foreign sanction was treason, and yes there are candidates who are not aligned even if the traditional pandem refused to show.

Im a lot more disappointed by the pandem whole fucktard strategy than I am by the predictable DAB sycophancy. Maybe always calling for disruption, insulting and blocking debate doesn't work and they could try something more subtle and more patient.

They were elected in big number since forever and I feel they shot themselves in the foot and it's hard to defend them even if the DAB is asinine. So I guess, blank.

The problem with a pick whoever you want approach is that inside players game the system and you end up with a table top sized voting form. Pick one above the line from out of seven or number all your choice from 1 to 49 below the line is a workable approach. Owners of the media, religiocults and background radiation vantablack money tilt the playing field on West's Democracies.

The uttering 'I dont believe them blindly' could be literal (there is always a chance), but/yet it is very much the language that an attemptive manipulator could adopt. Suggesting some kind of animal "adoption of stance through imitation of the acting wise". I was surprised to see, in this context, in the past few years, some clearly absurd pieces of communication that comprised images of ignorance and images of "revealing" knowledge.

This given, q., let us not forget the guidelines, «Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like».

The "political interest" is out of here, this is a place for debate on intellectually relevant topics. The interest here (specifically to these "theoretical suggestions" the new account/member triggered) is in language, response, awareness of the instruments, intellectual processes, intellectual productivity.