this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
1063 points (98.8% liked)

News

27517 readers
3983 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

What's the longest lifespan of a democratic state in human history? Now compare it to the average lifespan of monarchies, for example.

[–] suicidaleggroll@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The measure of whether a system of government is good or bad is not "how long it lasts".

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 day ago

It's the main criterion. If the system doesn't last, then it's shit regardless of what it is. The main purpose of the government (and any organization, for that matter) is to exist for as long as possible, everything else comes second. I wonder what other criteria do you have in mind?

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 0 points 18 hours ago

okay russian shill, go back to /ML/.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Roman Republic wasn't a democracy. It was ruled by aristocratic families. Lol.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

The argument is that they were a democratic republic.

several popular assemblies of all free citizens, possessing the power to elect magistrates from the populace and pass laws; and a series of magistracies with varying types of civil and political authority.

If you're referring to direct democracy, I suppose we could consider the Athenian democracy, though I think there are other examples from different regions on the planet through antiquity.

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Popular assemblies composed of common citizens could maybe decide where to put a public toilet on a street. Most laws were passed by the senate (composed of aristocrats), and consuls/other top magistrates were appointed by the senate.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

So you were there and knew everything about it?

Look, Mr./Mrs. iAmATotallyReasonablePersonAndNotAnInsufferableCunt, are you going to provide some evidence of whatever point you're trying to make, or should we do this tit-for-tat some more?

Either way, no sweat. Happy to yell at the clouds with you until the heat-death of the universe.

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Will you provide any evidence for your claims? It's not me who's claiming Roman republic was a democratic state (lol). "popular assemblies composed of common citizens" lol, look up centuriate assembly and see how many votes common sitizens had in it (spoiler: 0.5% of total votes).

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Evidence I was talking about were links to books about primary historical sources that I could read.

If the Roman Republic, isn't democratic enough for you, then, as I said, we could talk about the Athenians. Or perhaps the Iroquois League.

But what was your point again? The merit and utility of a system of governance is measured by how long it lasts, or something to that effect?

In your words,

  1. Democracy is shit.

and,

Demonstrably false.

in response to (paraphrasing), "other systems of government other than democracy are worse."

So, educate me and everyone else, then. What are you talking about, and send some links to back up whatever that is.

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

If the Roman Republic, isn’t democratic enough for you, then, as I said, we could talk about the Athenians

Athenian democracy existed for less than 200 years and Athens were a village with 10k population. Might as well just talk about US so that democracy doesn't embarass itself.

Or perhaps the Iroquois League.

What about it?

The merit and utility of a system of governance is measured by how long it lasts

Yep.

What are you talking about, and send some links to back up whatever that is.

What's not clear to you? You said it yourself: ">The merit and utility of a system of governance is measured by how long it lasts". Let's conduct a thought experiment. What's better, your current government, or or new ideal government that has perfect conditions for its citizens, but only lasts for 1 day and then the state collapses?

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

A dictatorship may last for millennia, but the duration of a system of government's continuity is not the sole, nor most important, attribute when judging its legitimacy, utility, merit for all its citizens.

You're taking a teenage edgelord's, or if serious, a ~~sociopath's~~ dictator's position, as if that's something to aspire to be.

[–] blade_barrier@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

but the duration of a system of government’s continuity is not the sole, nor most important, attribute when judging its legitimacy, utility, merit for all its citizens.

  1. Not all government forms have the institution of citizenship

  2. Why isn't longevity the most important attribute? Any organization's goal is to last as long as possible. All other goals come second.

You’re taking a teenage edgelord’s, or if serious, a sociopath’s dictator’s position, as if that’s something to aspire to be.

Unrelated to the discussion, ad hominem.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Once again, duration is irrelevant to the claim of legitimate authority because time doesn't solely and objectively provide any evidence of people's willing acceptance of that group or individual's authority. This is more commonly known as the social contract via consent of the governed.

The group/individual, of course, can make claims to not needing said consent via spurious arguments like the one you're making, but the claim does nothing to objectively show any utility, and thus, merit, for the populace they seek to exert power and influence over.

Basically, if you say "I'm in control forever because I've always been in control and my goal is to always be in control forever.", most thinking people, including myself, would rightly say "Gargle my bullets after gargling my balls." Also, your reasoning on why you have to be in charge has no bearing on whether you being in charge is good for people, effective at the tasks of governance, or even objectively good for yourself.

A similar argument to what you're saying would be, "Ford makes the best cars because they have been making cars the longest." It's demonstrably false, to use your own words.

Whether you consider my opinion of your opinions and you as ad hominem or not is irrelevant.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -1 points 18 hours ago

It was ruled by aristocratic families.

We're not so different after all!