Karl Popper made the point of democracy being the only form of government that provides getting rid of those in power without bloodshed and violence.

If voting will not remove them, what will?

Voting will remove them, that’s the point.

If voting could remove them it wouldn't be allowed.

This is a pithy description of a post-democratic political system. Its pithiness does not make it an accurate description of any given political system.

Please don't shoot the canary in the coalmine. Quoth JFK, in 1962:

> Those who make peaceful transition impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.

No, they are sometimes necessary.

Or, in box terms four boxes to be used in the defence of liberty in the given order, these being the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box and finally the ammunition box.

Violence is a law of nature and a law of human history. Voting was created as an alternative to violence - I think most of us have forgotten that. Voting allows us to achieve similar results as the former solution (killing powerful people who abuse their power), but without anyone actually having to die.

It's not surprising that if voting stops working as an alternative to violence, the world goes back to violence. And if that happens, whoever starts first has the advantage of surprise.

Game theory is the most powerful force on the planet, and it sucks.

According to HN moderators, this is a bad comment and I should be punished for posting it.

> It's not surprising that if voting stops working as an alternative to violence, the world goes back to violence.

“If” is doing a lot of work in this unsubstantiated comment.

I've been informed that positive statements about politics aren't really allowed on HN - they're "too ideological" - and my account has been restricted for making too many of them. As I understand, it's allowed to say things like "in situation X it wouldn't be surprising that Y" but not to say "because X, Y"

> According to HN moderators, this is a bad comment and I should be punished for posting it.

Ironically, this is the only line that I see that goes against the forum's expectations for decorum. What do you think you would otherwise be punished for saying? (And to be honest, I don't think the last line adds _anything_ to the discussion.)

The forum doesn't just have civility standards; it also has standards for the content of what you say. Apparently it's not allowed to make claims about politics. You have to say "I think" in front of everything.

Regardless, I enjoyed the rest of your comment!

People, at least in France, but another country if as well iirc, rejected the EU constitution in 2005. It is in place, though.

The only reason you have voting booths is because someone in the past threatened someone else and made them agree to a democratic process. These threats to privacy are a threat to free speech and therefore a credible threat to democracy and personal liberty. By implementing these policies, politicians are guaranteeing violence. By all means try to change things peacefully, but in my opinion the current crop of politicians (especially outside the US) don't care so much what you think about their awful policies.

When voting is made ineffective by design, such as via gerrymandering, what other recourse do you propose remains for citizens?

Official authorised protests in designated zones away from areas that would inconvenient for politicians?

Making jokes about the people in charge in public forums such as late night TV shows and then hoping the regulator doesn’t threaten to require the termination of your job as a precondition for government approvals?

What exactly can ordinary people do that is effective at reigning in autocracts?

What a sad and hopeless take. Gerrymandering is as fixable as any other problem. What makes you believe violent revolution will create a better outcome than what the last violent revolution created?

> What exactly can ordinary people do that is effective at reigning in autocracts?

Vote for someone better. Get involved in the political process. Stop acting defeated.

> Gerrymandering is as fixable as any other problem.

Can you link some historical examples of gerrymandering being fixed, where there wasn’t a violent revolution or something similar “wiping the slate clean”?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_S... is a good start. I'm sure you can find specific examples if you go looking.

All of these remedies were put in place through peaceful democratic processes as were solutions to countless other problems.

>When voting is made ineffective by design, such as via gerrymandering, what other recourse do you propose remains for citizens?

Gerrymandering is awful but you seem to be under the mistaken impression that only Republicans do it. Both parties do it. At least the Republicans aren't trying to import the entire third world to pad numbers and get a loyal multitude of welfare cases behind them.

>Official authorised protests in designated zones away from areas that would inconvenient for politicians?

You have the right to protest in the US, not impede and intimidate law enforcement and traffic, nor to loot and destroy buildings in the vicinity of your "protest."

>Making jokes about the people in charge in public forums such as late night TV shows and then hoping the regulator doesn’t threaten to require the termination of your job as a precondition for government approvals?

How about the countless people censored on Twitter and YouTube, and the obvious political prosecutions of an ex president based on bullshit? I don't agree with censorship or two wrongs make a right, but these people are getting the abuse that they provoked.

>What exactly can ordinary people do that is effective at reigning in autocracts?

In the US, voting works. But there are evidently unelected officials in the US and around the world who control a surprising amount of policy. They work against the will of their constituents on many issues. Things are not so bad yet but I'm not sure they will never get so bad that violence would not be justified. The only reason we can vote at all is because a group of independent thinkers told a monarch to go to hell, and come get some if you don't like it. Words on paper don't guarantee your rights.

I never said Republican. I’m not a Democrat. I don’t even live in the United States.

Your guilt is showing.

> How about the countless people censored on Twitter and YouTube, and the obvious political prosecutions of an ex president based on bullshit?

Is it bullshit?

How are you so certain?

Must all actions by politician be somehow “tainted” by partisan tactics without objective foundation?

Here, let me pick a random example of blatant wrongdoing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$Trump

Explain how it would be “bullshit” to impeach Trump over that.

Would that be “political prosecution” or long overdue justice?

>I don’t even live in the United States.

Sorry to hear that.

>Your guilt is showing.

Gtfo with that. I just know that has been a Democrat talking point lately, because there was some locale with Republican gerrymandering.

>Must all actions by politician be somehow “tainted” by partisan tactics without objective foundation?

No, but these were tainted by partisan politics, and also very unconstitutional. Maybe you are ok with censorship but most Americans recognize it as incompatible with democracy.

>Here, let me pick a random example of blatant wrongdoing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$Trump

That sucks but I don't think it's illegal. And that is NOT what they went after him for over a period of 8+ years. They manufactured hoaxes about fraud, rape, Russia collusion, and an insurrection and went after him and everyone he was associated with so bad that the dude could hardly find any lawyers to take the cases. All while saying he and his supporters are literal Nazis for specific very mainstream policy preferences like "let's not import the third world or destroy American jobs with excess immigrants" or "let's not fight wars all over the world as we are going bankrupt over here"... God forbid you wear a MAGA hat, or the crazed thugs will attack you. All of these things are ACTUAL political persecution. Trump is not perfect but he is not at all what he's been made out to be.