So, free and fair elections. Well, now we’re back to square one, and pretty much describing how Western democracies work.
Consider Australia: all of the major political parties nakedly serve the interests of capital, and decide who can and cannot run in their elections. This is the case in all of the liberal “democracies”. They aren’t “free and fair” elections by any reasonable definition.
Normally I don’t respond to low level comments like this, but the intellectual laziness here is mind boggling. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
…I really, really hope that you are being deliberately obtuse here in refusing to acknowledge that they are asking what you mean by the term to further the conversation. The other option is that you think there’s some context where asking a person you disagree with for some kind of objective definition makes sense, and that really, really doesn’t speak highly of your reasoning ability. Different people have wildly different understandings of “authoritarian”.
False, that is the result of capitalism when it goes unchecked, not the definition. And different countries have different levels of checks on capitalism.
…you don’t think that the existence of a capitalist ruling class is part of the definition of capitalism? Why are liberals always so happy to lecture people on the basis of What I Reckon Sounds About Right Probably…
It always stands out to me that, even if I accept the tenets of liberal electoralism, VBNMW doesn’t work! Your vote is your power within that system. If you will vote for the democratic candidate regardless, why would they feel any need to do what you want? You aren’t depositing voter-credit in an account which you can then draw on to alter their platform. They already have everything they want from you!
Just infuriating.
Just that everything it says about its geopolitical rivals can be assumed to be true.