Should the West repeal womens' suffrage ?

[Dachshund]

Times change. As things stand, patriarchies are dying because they are non competitive.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

NB: in the post above I intended to say " mankind has managed to prevail in creating a genuinely free society". I omitted the word "managed" by mistake.

In the context of all the rubbish you've come out with so far, that particular mistake is hardly worth bothering about.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

It still amazes people how some people are still stuck in the medieval ages.
What amazes me still is how people elect a POTUS that shares this mentality.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

I guess it's not so difficult to tell.

So now I think an interesting (vaguely philosophical?) question is: When somebody plays a part - strikes a pose - to provoke a response, is it still interesting to respond? If the imitation-duck consistently plays the part of the duck, does the Duck a l'Orange still taste as good?

Greta: If a real person, with actual influence in the world, was seriously proposing to disenfranchise you simply on the basis of your chromosome combinations, then naturally you have a certain moral duty to fight it. But if some words on a screen on an obscure website with (I presume) no influence does it, does that duty still exist? If an artificially constructed bigot falls over in an empty website, does it make a noise?

I suppose it's a bit like watching or reading fiction. Fictional "bad guys", if they're played well, can make us genuinely angry. But it takes a good script, and good acting, to do it well. Dachshund, in that sense, doesn't entirely do it for me.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

I knew the alt-right was a problem but I never imagined that they would go as far as to wind the clock back over a century and effectively deny women personhood. It's all rather nauseating. Do you really believe that Australia was in better shape in 1900 than it has been since suffrage? How can you believe such obvious falsehoods?

Dachs, everything you have said is so utterly wrong and unbalanced that it's hard to know where to start. Your spite, hatreds and insults against ideological enemies are also pretty extraordinary. I suspect that this fanaticism - basically alt-right fundamentalism - is largely due to fear of change and resentment against regular female rejection.

I do not believe in evil but the alt-right appears to be as close as it gets in the west's mainstream.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

Dachshund, I think that's the full checklist of hates delivered by you so far:

- blecks
- Arabs
- women
- gays
- abortionists.

Have I missed any? Transsexuals surely - almost everyone hates them anyway. Asians? How are you with them? Aboriginals? I can't imagine you'd approve.

Why do you embrace this standard grab bag of hatreds? My father also had that same suite of hatreds...

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Dachshund]

Quid pro quo (as Hannibal Lecter used to say to Agent Starling) . More on your back story:

Born and raised as a child in the US, as a teenager and adult resided in Australia and became an Aust citizen. Married an English women in my 30s and spent many years in UK as well. Hence a mixture of Western backgrounds and experiences.

Still married? Wife still alive? If so, what are her views on this? Have you asked her? Do you consider them relevant?

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

[Steve3007]

Yes, you have correctly identified the issue of taxation and big government and the FACT that women have , since the early 1970s predominantly voted for high- taxing, left-wing parties.

As shown in the link I posted earlier, the difference appears to depend more on age than gender in the UK. As I said, if your aim is to restrict voting rights to people who vote in the way that you want them to, as you've indicated it is, then you'd be better off using age rather than gender as your criterion. Both are equally easily enforced. The minimum voting age has been progressively reduced over the years. Why not just increase it again to achieve your aims?

While this is true in the strictly technical sense that each member of the adult population is granted one equally valued vote in elections, the reality is that today's Western nations are not really democracies at all; not at least according to the classical Greek meaning of the term, which defined democracy in a polis like ancient Athens as a system of government based on GENUINELY EQUAL political rights ( e.g. true universal "one vote, one value" suffrage), freedom of speech and a GENUINELY EQUAL opportunity for all citizens to participate directly in the political arena

In countries of millions of people I presume it wouldn't be practicable for all citizens to participate directly in the political arena, as in a small city state. Hence representative democracy in which we make choices based on broad political principles (left or right, big or small government etc) and leave the policy details to others.

I generally tend to accept the commonly expressed idea that democracy (as defined in modern times) is a terrible system, but every other system tried so far has been even worse. So it'll have to do.

So, to go back to my earlier question: Given the modern understanding of democracy, do you agree that you are proposing to abolish it and restrict voting to people based on whether they agree with your personal views? Your answer to this seems to be that we don't actually live in any kind of democracy at all. In which case, why bother with allowing anyone to vote at all? Why not just propose that we all accept whatever government you tell us we should have?

[Steve3007]

A point of order:

In your view, am I entitled to use the "PUT UP OR SHUT UP" thing whenever you talk about my spine, testosterone or testicles, as you tend to do every now and then?

[Maxcady10001]

Why are you using put up or shut up with old posts?
Also, you seemed to have skipped over my completely relevant post on Plato.

If you accept Plato's logic, why would you propose a government system without female participation? This seems to make for an inefficent system, if you are not going to allow for the most exceptional women to participate. Plato said

"Can there be anything better for a state than that it should contain the best possible men and women?"(Plato's Republic, pg. 163)

He also said

"But as for the man who laughs at the idea of undressed women going through gymnastic excercises, as a means of realizing what is most perfect, his ridicule is but "unripe fruit plucked from the tree of wisdom, " and he knows not, to all appearance what he is laughing at or what he is doing: for it is and ever will be a most excellent maxim, that the useful is noble, and the hurtful is base"(Plato's Republic, pg. 164)

If you seriously consider Plato's philosophy, your argument is untenable, because it forgets the "utility" of women. Also, you have not put any arguments forward, as already mentioned.

[Sy Borg]

Enough. Dachshund, you are on your last warning.