Democracy, in the hands of the proletariat, not the bourgeoisie. The government should oppress the capitalist class and uplift the proletariat, political power should be stripped from capitalists and lay with the proletariat instead. This is the “dictatorship of the proletariat” over the bourgeoisie.
Democracy, obviously. No it doesn’t change if I’m the dictator.
Democratic dictatorship of the proletariat
Why do some of the questions asked in this sub make it sound like the OP’s first day as a human being?
Why do you dance around like this instead of just answering the question?
Dictatorship by a wide margin. Why should the parliament squabble over a law for months, possibly years, when under a dictatorship said law could be enacted instantly? Also with democracy every politician just thinks about getting elected, not the actual long-term needs of the country.
The squabbling process moves the law toward meeting the needs of more people. If a dictator just gets to decide what the law is, they’ll likely be self-serving to the dictator, or even outright harmful to entire categories of people.
According to election theory, a dictatorship is the only perfectly fair voting system: the only voter wins the vote, every time.
Online? Dictatorship. Let the guidelines be clear and the conversations civil and on topic. If my speech isn’t wanted in a particular community I can find another, or make another where I’m the dictator.
IRL? Democracy. It sucks, but it’s better than everything else. I do, however, wish there were better laws forcing media to be locally owned, and bound to be truthful. And some way to keep late stage capitalism’s hand off the scales.
(first, thank you for achieving the straightforwardness that has escaped so many others here)
What is the difference between online society and irl society that makes dictatorship preferable in one and democracy preferable in the other?
Is it the size? The complexity?
Online spaces are limitless, basically. If you don’t like living under someone else’s rules it’s dead easy to spin up your own space with your own rules. The dictatorship-ness of these virtual spaces keeps then semi-civil and on-topic. Ideally, at least. We are talking spherical cows here, obvs.
Real life spaces, not so easy to spin up your own country. So we have to use a political system that (on paper, at least) caters to the majority without stepping on the minorities too much.
To build off this. Part of why people, who come off as reasonable and decent in person, can get so…very…VERY unhinged online is that
Tap for personal opinion
you don’t have to see the reaction of the people who read/hear what you’re putting out there. Even in places where you don’t actually have any real anonymity, there’s an assumption that because no one is in the room with you while you madly smash away at your keyboard…well… People used to say there’s no girls on the internet…I feel like most people just type whatever like there’s no PEOPLE on the internet…
TL;DR - can’t see people being disgusted with what you just said.
People are generally very breakfast cereal. One musn’t get worried about that.
And the incongruity here. Preferring the one kind of government for one kind of society, but the other for another. That’s a big deal. Bears discussing.
It’s one of those things that you wonder why nobody ever pointed it out.
Homie had his shit removed and now its everyone’s problem.
Actually somebody else got their shit removed and I wax philosophical on their behalf. I’m sophisticated that way.
???
Democracy, like mostly anyone. But it depends on anyone’s conception, here.
If the dictator was you, might that make dictatorship more attractive?
No.
Depends on the dictator, depends on the democracy. Ideally neither, but democracies are usually less awful than dictatorships.
How about for lemmy?
Lemmy is inherently democratic. If you don’t like a muni, or an instance, you go to another one. Without centralization dictatorship is impossible.
That said, it’s not democracy, either: It’s a federation of interdependent polities, each with their own laws and administrators. Which is good, because it allows for rapid response to spam, inappropriate content, and verbal violence.
And if the admins or moderators overreach, well, back to the first paragraph: we’ve got open borders, go homestead your own community on another instance. You literally cannot be silenced here.
Closer to anarchy, seemingly.
Inappropriate to compare with governmental organizations. Differing goals.
Democracy means that power is held by the people. It doesn’t mean that if you don’t like it you can leave.
It’s called “voting with your feet”. Being free to leave is power. Means a hell of a lot more than up- and down-doots.
In a democracy the vote determines policy.
But this is obvious. Right?
You saw the whole paragraph where I talked about how lemmy is not a democracy, right? And literally cited this as one if the reasons why?
Like I get that you’re probably responding to multiple subthreads right now, but it only takes a few seconds to scroll up.
And you also stated that it is inherently democratic.
Would it kill you to stop being so coy and evasive?
It’s a thousand dictatorships.
In a democracy, the community determines policy. Votes are orthogonal. If the community leaves when they disagree, by definition everyone that is remains agrees with the policy, making it a democratic policy. The friction to changing instance is very minimal, so it’s a good indicator of people’s opinions.
Yeah but they aren’t actually determining policy. Obviously.
Why are you bullshitting?
Who would realistically say dictator? Putin?
Every moderator on lemmy, apparently.
just dominate them bro
Sure
