Asklemmy

Okay, so regarding democracy, when you said you didn't vote to allow a genocide in Gaza, were you saying a vote should have been taken, thus making the United States a more democratic country?

I was giving an example to challenge common presumptions about what is democratic and what something with that labels can then be used to justify. The idea is to get you to think critically and ask your own questions about what the true meaning of that label is by how it gets applied. It's not about what is simply true democracy and what is not. It's what function the term and concept serves in our societies, particularly Western ones where it is used chauvinistically and is full of contradictions. Nothing can be more "authoritarian" (the other half of this concept's dichotomy) than inflicting mass death and disposession and there isn't even a fig leaf of requiring informed consent from the people of the state that's supporting the genocide you see happening right in front of you. At the same time, the label of "democracy" is used everywhere to justify these dehumanizing, racist actions. Have you ever heard, "only democracy in the Middle East"? Have you ever wondered what makes an apartheid settler ethnostate democratic? What does it really mean?

The goal is to get you to critically engage with the tropes and thought-controlling cliches at work here. Your questions are full of them. It's clear you've never really questioned hegemonic thinking and at the moment you're being combative towards the idea of applying a little critical thinking or, God forbid, answering my questions or statements.

If that's the case, then we agree that more democracy is good. If that's not the case, why did you bring it up?

That last question is the only thing you should've said in reply to my first comment. An attempt to understand rather than an attempt to eagerly dismiss what you have never investigated.

I have answered that question twice now, though.