- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
When do we, and the West in general, start to accept the fact that Democracy failed?
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:27 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:27 pm
In another 100yrs the US will either look like the Terran Federation in Starship Troopers, (or, God willing, the Imperium) or it'll be a mix of Mexico & Africa with only our monuments left to mark the once great civilization that existed here.
Voting is irrelevant now. I don't have any answers, nor do I know where we go from here, but it's clear that Liberal Democracy has run its course.
Maybe Gen Z & following generations will represent the titanic pendulum swing back to the Right that's just waiting to happen. And I don't mean Republican Right, it might be a little spicier than that. Sure would be nice if they were actually having kids because the invaders all breed like rabbits.
Voting is irrelevant now. I don't have any answers, nor do I know where we go from here, but it's clear that Liberal Democracy has run its course.
Maybe Gen Z & following generations will represent the titanic pendulum swing back to the Right that's just waiting to happen. And I don't mean Republican Right, it might be a little spicier than that. Sure would be nice if they were actually having kids because the invaders all breed like rabbits.
30
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:29 pm to Tom288
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:30 pm to Tom288
I imagine we’ll put up a pretty fierce fight in the next 100 years to keep the country from going to where it’s currently headed
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
Ahh, when you don't have anything to offer you can at least fall back on the good old-fashioned ad hominem. He's melting, durrr hurr hurr.
ETA: Guys, there's a difference between melting down and realizing that the form of government, which is responsible for fueling the very reason this board exists, is no longer working. But you dummies can just downvote and throw out your stupid shite if ya want lol
ETA 2: OBVIOUSLY I know we have a Constitutional Republic, apparently you geniuses never considered that my critique is actually more expansive in nature. And Constitutional Republics are great, when you have an entirely homogenous population and even then further restrictions on who gets to vote should be implemented.
ETA: Guys, there's a difference between melting down and realizing that the form of government, which is responsible for fueling the very reason this board exists, is no longer working. But you dummies can just downvote and throw out your stupid shite if ya want lol
ETA 2: OBVIOUSLY I know we have a Constitutional Republic, apparently you geniuses never considered that my critique is actually more expansive in nature. And Constitutional Republics are great, when you have an entirely homogenous population and even then further restrictions on who gets to vote should be implemented.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:32 pm to Tom288
quote:
When do we, and the West in general, start to accept the fact that Democracy failed?
I would suggest you start with googling "Republic".
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:33 pm to CharlesUFarley
quote:
I would suggest you start with googling "Republic".
I bet you felt cute when you thought of that burn.
OMG of course, we're actually a Constitutional Republic, I NEVER KNEW!
Retard
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:34 pm to Tom288
Democracy always fails which is why we had a Republic. The Republic is what the Dems have spent 100 years attacking.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:34 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
I imagine we’ll put up a pretty fierce fight in the next 100 years to keep the country from going to where it’s currently headed
The fight will happen in the next decade at this pace. A reckoning is coming sooner rather than later.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
Slowfappingpro go Corky!
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:34 pm to Tom288
What Democratic Socialism Entails
Democratic socialism seeks to achieve socialist goals—greater economic equality, expanded public ownership or control over key sectors, heavy redistribution, and strong welfare states—through democratic elections and reforms rather than revolution.
Proponents (e.g., Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the US) distinguish it from authoritarian communism, emphasizing democracy + capitalism regulation + social ownership elements. Critics argue it is a slippery slope: it expands state power over the economy while retaining democratic forms, often leading to inefficiencies, dependency, and pressure for more control.
The Threat to Liberal Democracy
Voter incentives and expansion: Democratic socialism leverages majority rule to promise benefits (free college, healthcare, housing, Green New Deal-style policies). This aligns with public choice dynamics: short-term gains for voters at diffuse long-term costs (higher taxes, debt, slower growth). Polling shows younger Americans more favorable to "socialism" (often equating it with welfare) than capitalism.
Institutional strain: Extensive state intervention blurs lines between politics and economics. As government controls more resources, political power becomes the path to wealth, fostering rent-seeking, cronyism, and polarization. Hayek and others noted that "omnipotent democracy" tends toward unplanned socialism via special interests.
Empirical risks: Pushes for egalitarianism correlate with declining support for democratic norms in some studies—citizens may prioritize equality over liberty or institutional constraints when trade-offs appear. Mixed economies can stabilize but often face sclerosis (high taxes, regulation stifling innovation).
Historical parallels: Post-war social democracy delivered growth initially but required market-oriented corrections (e.g., UK under Thatcher, Nordic adjustments). Unchecked versions contributed to stagnation or crises. Full "democratic socialism" has not produced a thriving, scalable model without relying on underlying capitalist dynamism.
Democratic socialism seeks to achieve socialist goals—greater economic equality, expanded public ownership or control over key sectors, heavy redistribution, and strong welfare states—through democratic elections and reforms rather than revolution.
Proponents (e.g., Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the US) distinguish it from authoritarian communism, emphasizing democracy + capitalism regulation + social ownership elements. Critics argue it is a slippery slope: it expands state power over the economy while retaining democratic forms, often leading to inefficiencies, dependency, and pressure for more control.
The Threat to Liberal Democracy
Voter incentives and expansion: Democratic socialism leverages majority rule to promise benefits (free college, healthcare, housing, Green New Deal-style policies). This aligns with public choice dynamics: short-term gains for voters at diffuse long-term costs (higher taxes, debt, slower growth). Polling shows younger Americans more favorable to "socialism" (often equating it with welfare) than capitalism.
Institutional strain: Extensive state intervention blurs lines between politics and economics. As government controls more resources, political power becomes the path to wealth, fostering rent-seeking, cronyism, and polarization. Hayek and others noted that "omnipotent democracy" tends toward unplanned socialism via special interests.
Empirical risks: Pushes for egalitarianism correlate with declining support for democratic norms in some studies—citizens may prioritize equality over liberty or institutional constraints when trade-offs appear. Mixed economies can stabilize but often face sclerosis (high taxes, regulation stifling innovation).
Historical parallels: Post-war social democracy delivered growth initially but required market-oriented corrections (e.g., UK under Thatcher, Nordic adjustments). Unchecked versions contributed to stagnation or crises. Full "democratic socialism" has not produced a thriving, scalable model without relying on underlying capitalist dynamism.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:36 pm to Madking
quote:
Democracy always fails which is why we had a Republic. The Republic is what the Dems have spent 100 years attacking.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:36 pm to Warboo
I highly doubt it’s 10.
It’ll take another wave of Dem leadership. And that one will probably just really annoy folks.
But if they get a couple and fire up the illegal alien importing, and then things get really bad, I could see some shite popping off.
I’m thinking 30 years at the very earliest.
It’ll take another wave of Dem leadership. And that one will probably just really annoy folks.
But if they get a couple and fire up the illegal alien importing, and then things get really bad, I could see some shite popping off.
I’m thinking 30 years at the very earliest.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:36 pm to Tom288
Having impulse control issues isn’t a good sign
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:37 pm to Tom288
Well, there is a decent chance your next GOP presidential nominee is the most post liberal in modern history.
Liberalism can work, at least for longer than it has in our case, but it can't work very well or for very long untethered from the structures that support and birthed it.
You're just not going to have a highly multicultural, often borderless, areligious, geographically spread out welfare state with liberal governance without ever-growing fractures and problems. People will act like you're insane for acknowledging this, or a political zealot, when it's an inescapable human nature reality rather than a political position.
Liberalism can work, at least for longer than it has in our case, but it can't work very well or for very long untethered from the structures that support and birthed it.
You're just not going to have a highly multicultural, often borderless, areligious, geographically spread out welfare state with liberal governance without ever-growing fractures and problems. People will act like you're insane for acknowledging this, or a political zealot, when it's an inescapable human nature reality rather than a political position.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:39 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
we’ll put up a pretty fierce fight in the next 100 years to keep the country from going to where it’s currently headed
I would like to think so, but there is nothing to base that hope on, to date. We just watched 30 million illegals - many fit military aged males - pour in across our border, unchecked, and when the next Democrat takes office, we will watch it, again. And yes, I understand the problem ranges way beyond the border, but it’s an example of how complacent we are.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 4:17 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:40 pm to Madking
quote:
Having impulse control issues isn’t a good sign
Neither is ED...you know, since we're apparently just completely making shite up here.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:40 pm to Warboo
quote:
The fight will happen in the next decade at this pace. A reckoning is coming sooner rather than later.
Nah
I could write a long paragraph about why. But the reality is, we don't have a white aggrieved underclass big enough to really kick anything like that off. The people who will grieve the loss of the country they grew up in will still make decent money and still have families to provide for and so forth. Look at the UK or Northern Ireland, who has a much larger white underclass, and they still can't really sustain any reactionary action for long.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:42 pm to Tom288
Nobody made anything up. If you want people to know what you mean, post what you mean and don’t throw a fit because you made an error.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:42 pm to Tom288
WE ARE NOT AND NEVER HAVE BEEN A DEMOCRACY.
Keep saying it over and over until it sticks.
Keep saying it over and over until it sticks.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 3:43 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
You're just not going to have a highly multicultural, often borderless, areligious, geographically spread out welfare state with liberal governance without ever-growing fractures and problems.
I would argue that those problems are the inevitable outcome of Liberalism. It's not like they developed in a lab and were just tossed on our Government like a particular bird flu or something. We're seeing end-stage Liberalism here, particularly the postwar consensus.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News