Isn't Republican vs Democrat one of the biggest psy ops ever?

[Richmondbread]

Especially as of late, where each side is trying to figure out who are the "real racists". All these Boomer neo cons are still stuck on who is more "racist". The Republicans virtue signal to get their black voters by exposing the "racist" history of the Democrat party. As if Republicans can't possibly be racist. Then the Democrats who started all of this, just chime back with denouncing Trump supporters as bigots. Each side is so devoted to their own party, as if the party is God to them. I don't see why they don't get at this point it doesn't even matter. We have a communist insurgency. Dinesh D'Souza is the worst perpetrator of such nonsense.

[Smeagol]

Just focus on electing MAGA candidates next year. A lot of neo-cons are retiring next year and we can primary the rest. Communists completely took over the Democrat party, we can do the same with the Republicans.

[JamesBond007]

Especially as of late, where each side is trying to figure out who are the "real racists". All these Boomer neo cons are still stuck on who is more "racist". The Republicans virtue signal to get their black voters by exposing the "racist" history of the Democrat party. As if Republicans can't possibly be racist. Then the Democrats who started all of this, just chime back with denouncing Trump supporters as bigots. Each side is so devoted to their own party, as if the party is God to them. I don't see why they don't get at this point it doesn't even matter. We have a communist insurgency. Dinesh D'Souza is the worst perpetrator of such nonsense.

A case of feedback which stabilizes tyranny in 'democratic' countries is what, for lack of better terminology, may be called a 'non- proportional-representation election system'. By this I mean any system in which there are just two (or occasionally three) major political parties or candidates, and where the only voting option is to vote for just one. The effect of such a system is to marginalize the competition by inducing voters to vote for one of the two or three major parties or candidates on the theory that a vote for a minor party or candidate will constitute 'wasting one's vote'. The dynamic here is that, by convincing each voter that the competition 'can't win', this forecloses that very possibility, ie, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy in which belief of impossibility causes the impossibility. This, of course, is a feedback loop similar.

To foreclose the feedback loop which puts political competition out of the loop, it is necessary to have a proportional-representation electoral system. In the principal form in which it has actually been instituted (mostly in Europe), each voter casts his vote for a single party, and the proportion of the total votes cast which a party attracts determines the number of the party's representatives to hold seats in the legislative assembly. In terms of systems theory, the proportional-representation system is superior not merely because it disrupts the feedback loop which damps out political competition, but also because it is a more accurate method of conveying the information of voter preferences to the body which will do the governing.

Don't fall for the liberal-conservative dichotomy. It is false and misleading, and is easily used by tyrants to restrict freedom. For example, our 'conservative' tyrants have given us a 'war on drugs' which has eviscerated many of our rights; while our liberal tyrants have given us 'civil rights' which have eviscerated even more rights. The point is that the only real political divide is between small government (whose harm is limited) and Big Government (whose harm seems to be unlimited) -- a divide which really translates into the question of how much taxes should the government be allowed to impose on you/us.

The most important fights for freedom are not over drugs, sex or other pleasure activities, but rather over more subtle issues like speech, gun control, and -- most important of all -- taxes. The reason for this is that pleasure activities have a natural constituency -- the people who indulge in the activity -- who can be expected, in one way or another, to fight for freedom in these areas because it is very much in their personal interest to do so. This is not to say that such fights are not important, for they very much are -- it is just to say that they are not priority.