The affinity towards dictators could be partially explained by this

https://youtu.be/rE3j_RHkqJc

And because of FPTPs ability to drown voices that are not popular, these dictatorial leaders tend to rise at the top, and only option becomes the other party. The equilibrium of FPTP is a two party system, exactly like the one we see in America.

Unfortunately Trump is a product of this exact machinery.

I say it's more complicated in that these dictators control mass media and hence why the "vote dictator" germ is everywhere and sustained.

Back in 2016 people were saying that trump is a product of decades of propaganda. Like decades of propaganda got us to trump

The UK had a referendum on whether to adopt it and voted against. You ahould have seen the insane rubbish the "no" campaign said about it

I read "fujimotorist" for a second and it triggered my trauma from the chainsaw man fandom

uh did you miss the part where 'south america' isn't a country and that these people don't exist?

I'm America so I mean usa. I didn't think south Americans thought of themselves as south Americans. I south America was just a name English speakers made up

In my opinion, the control of mass media is a problem that comes after you elect a dictator. Like we're talking orban and netanyahu here. Trump did not have Media control until 2016. While arguably he did have some in 2024, his media control wasn't this strong at any point in history.

Media control is the reason why getting rid of dictators is extremely hard. What I am talking about is what even gets them into the office in the first place

Dunno which guy you mean but he wasn't anybody who cried wolf in a previous election. The facts he presented were exactly what I stated - statististically anomalous number of people voting for Trump and then voting for Democrats all the way down the ballot. That happens, but in several of the swing states it happened far more than it ever has, and yet just short of enough to trigger automatic recounts, and only with election-night voting. What you're responding with is opinion and calling those observations "wild assumptions" without saying what's wild about them, then some subjective opinion about Biden and genocide yada yada - pure opinion that I'm not here to argue about. The numbers are what they are.

These are getting progressively less bad.

In the US version the left side candidade would be "Identitaria Fatcatus-Loving", listed as:

• Got several million dollar plus campaign contributions
• Upper middle-class, never met a single poor person in her life and yet looks down on them
• Says one thing, does something else
• Doesn't talk about Wealth Inequality, EVER.
• Is <list of identitarian "specificities">

At least the "third"-world places often have electable left of center candidates, not just Fascist vs Warmongering Hardcore Neoliberal.

Power Duopolies are better than Power Monopolies but not by much and they certainly do not represent the true breadth of political beliefs of a population of millions of people.

In countries with such systems (at least in the ones I lived in) people get trained by the Press to expect everything boils down to "one side versus a the other side", but if you actually analyse the whole thing and think about even simple choices in groups of people (say, "we're should we go to next?" when out with friends) and it's very rare that even for just one thing there are only 2 prefered choices in a group with more than 2 people, so now imagine how many possibilities there are in all combinations of preferences for all the social and political choices in a country of millions.

Representative Democracy by necessity is a heavilly reduced and simplified reflection of the preferences in the society they mean to represent and those variants of it where the representation system is Mathematically Rigged to de facto reduce that representation to just two, is literally the second farthest political system from properly representing a population, with the farthest one being dictatorship.

Personally I don't count Power Duopolies like that real Democracies: a vote alone doesn't make something a Democracy, otherwise Russia would be a Democracy. The again I grew up in a country with a lot more open Democracy (though still far from perfect) and lived for almost a decade in one with Proportional Vote.

Because of the First Past The Post, even a Parliamentary system in the US with the current Mathematics of how Congress or the Senate representatives are allocated from votes (i.e. single winner per electoral circle) would be still be a two party system which doesn't represent most people.

Just look at Britain (which has a FPTP Parliamentary System) were the current party in Government has more than 50% of members of Parliament even though they got only 34% of votes and is arresting people as Terrorist Supporters for demonstrating against Britain's support for the Genocide in Gaza, has enacted quite extreme anti-Demonstration legislation and is passing electronic communications surveillance laws similar to those in Despotic Autocracies.

Absolutelly, Presidential systems where ONE PERSON ONLY supposedly manages the nation according to the will of millions are complete total bullshit because it's impossible that one person can reflect the preferences of millions, but Parliamentary systems with First Past The Post aren't much better because de facto they're generally equivalent to 2 sets of views rather than just 1 - theoretically multiple parliamentarians from the same party would mean multiple view, but my experience living in several such countries is that it's rare for a member of parliament not to vote the same as the rest of the party in a vote - I would estimate that dissent is in average less than 5%.

Oh, I hate FPtP too, much more of a ranked choice kinda guy. This was just me complaining about my stupid government's form.

I like Scotland's proportional representation system. It retains constituency candidates, but compensates non-winning parties with seats based on regional votes. Afaik Wales and Northern Ireland also have proportional systems in their devolved parliaments, so only England is lagging behind :P

Wait they don't? I think of myself as North American.

We can have nice things once we pass this math test.

I don't, but idk what other people view themselves

The thing is, no matter how much of an anarchist I want to be, I can’t fully support not voting. Because it’s precisely by not voting that the Diego Hitlerios come to power and screw us all over.

I'm also an Anarchist. I hate how the left has to shoot itself in the foot for the sake of purity constantly. Not voting doesn't make you more of an Anarchist, or whatever you are. It just makes it so you don't get a say in the election, and the right certainly doesn't have any of the same issues with voting. You should vote for whatever moves us toward the correct path, not avoid voting because you think you're too good for it.

Yes, elections suck. If they worked as well as we want we probably wouldn't have them (or we'd be in a very different situation and this wouldn't be an issue). However, participation takes almost no effort. The effect it has per unit of effort spent is pretty incredibly high. It's not going to change the world, but it will help some people, and it only takes you all of a few minutes usually.

It's amazing how people here still don't know what ranked choice voting is. I think video games that have voting, on maps or whatever, should implement ranked choice voting. It's do wonders to help them usually, and it'd also bring awareness of it to people who haven't heard of it. I don't think I've ever seen it in a game, but a popular game with it could do wonders in getting ranked choice voting passed.

This meme forgot to mention that the hitler candidate probably has a million dollar campaign funded by US billionaires or even the United States government itself and that he promised that when he won he would build 2 military bases in his territory, give up all his country's resources and infrastructure to US companies and a lot of land to zionist settlers.

digress though, the pre columbian latin america, had it's own problems, human sacrifice and such

we still do that, sacrifices to the gods aka death penalty. Sure, we justify it as a civilised sacrifice though.

I see you've heard of Milei

here, i found someone talking about this at the time that explains better than i can off just memory

he did cry wolf before - about the 2004 election, of all the ones to pick

(it is a patreon link but not paywalled)
https://www.patreon.com/rebecca/posts/stop-saying-2024-116409433

Because it’s precisely by not voting that the Diego Hitlerios come to power and screw us all over.

wish more people would realise this.

that's the thing! we will never know how south america would have developed without european influence. would the people there have reformed their society and abolished the death penalty? we can't say. but we can say for sure that we installed a system that has been durable for 600+ years that relies heavily on death squads to make sure the gold, bananas, coffee, and tea keep flowing south to north. we also don't know what movements and ideas were destroyed there because Spain and Portugal treated the Americas as a monolith. catholic missionaries have also been extremely selective in what tales become preserved to help create analagous structures between other religions and christianity, and what tales that didn't fit with that that we've lost forever

I don't believe the guy I'm thinking of ever made public comments about past elections; pretty sure he would have been a teenager in 2004.