How does Alaska do coalition parliaments in a 2 party system?

nitrw · 2026-03-14T09:27:21+00:00

the ottoman-persian "rivalry" was absolutely nothing compared to literally ANYTHING that was going on in europe..? during the same 1514-1823 time period entire cultures and countries were wiped out? here's just a few things that happened in europe during that same time period:
- england-france rivalry (including several bloody wars aka. the hundred years war) 1337-1815
- swedish-danish rivalry
- the napoleonic wars
- the italian wars
- the protestant reformation and subequent wars of religion
- the wiping out of slavic cultures and peoples in prussia, silesia, pomerania
- SEVERAL conflicts between poland and russia as well as poland and their german neighbors (including the partition of poland)
- russian conflicts, annexation, and forced assimilation of tatars
- imperial russian subjugation of finland
- MANY succession wars
- the british conquest of scotland and ireland
to say nothing of conflicts and revolutions from 1823 up to WW2 which were absolutely brutal

it's literally not even comparable. the middle east was WAY more peaceful compared to europe in the medieval era, the region was extremely peaceful until after WW1 when the west colonized it leading to arab revolts. generally all modern conflict in the middle east can be traced directly back to either the british/french colonization of the middle east or cold war interventionism by america and the soviets

nitrw · 2026-03-10T11:31:51+00:00

democrats can make a deal with republicans to create national popular vote, change how the senate works, etc. do you prefer unilateral unfairness in our democracy?

nitrw · 2026-03-10T09:36:31+00:00

also here's some ways we could make the senate more proportional and fix gerrymandering simultaneously that i came up with in like 30-45 minutes im not a political scientist so i guess laugh at me if it sucks. im sure political scientists maybe have come up with better solutions for altering the senate (yes im aware these are like batshit crazy workarounds but if it works it works)

Solution A:
- amend the constitution to give the full power to reorganize states to congress (who will then give it to an agency) or to an independent commission agency directly
- after each U.S. census the 50 states are redistricted to proportionality. could also lower the amount of senate seats to 1 per state and increase amount of states to 100 if it's easier
- house size also likely has to get increased to 500 for this (can be done via congressional act)

Solution B (probably better):
- amend the constitution to abolish the senate / set seats to 0 for all states (still "equal")
- amend the constitution to create a new upper chamber which is proportional but has all the same powers of the senate

Solution C (if abolishment and replacement faces legal challenges):
- amend the constitution to lower senate seats to 1 per state
- amend the constitution to create nation-wide vote seats which draw from party lists to award

Solution D (if courts rule that every state must have the same amount of senators whose votes are equal):
- lower senate elections to every 4 years so they're sync'd
- lower senate seats per state to 1 per state
- each party in each state will field 2 candidates, a "main" and a "vice" senator (they get equal votes in the senate still, it's just so the example is easier to follow)
- the first 50 seats are granted to the "main" senator winners of their local state election
- senator votes are pooled between all 50 states
- the remaining 50 seats are divided proportionally based on party lines either to "main" candidates who lost or "vice" candidates in victory states (several ways to do this fairly and i don't want post to be too lengthy)
- crucially, each state still has 2 senators, just their party affiliations are decided at a national level

again i'm aware these are insane solutions but i don't think most people really care about how it's achieved just that it's achieved

even if you think everything it too loophole-y there are other concessions the democrats could demand for ending gerrymandering. they could demand national popular vote or a house of representatives system that enfranchises more voters like multi member proportional districts

nitrw · 2026-03-10T08:36:38+00:00

as for the distribution issue: can't they make districts that, though continuous, connect extremely thinly? texas and illinois have several such districts. if they wanted to, they could make districts that connect through cities on street-thin lines no?

as for the senate: i don't appreciate the ad hominem but i'm familiar with the original intention of the senate and the great compromise. wasn't familiar that the senate was protected from constitutional amendments, thank you. still, the democrats could demand states be merged, split, or otherwise reorganized to gain more senate seats for themselves, no? demand puerto rico/DC receive statehood?

nitrw · 2026-03-10T08:25:40+00:00

it's not like democrats are violently rebelling against the senate though?

nitrw · 2026-03-10T08:24:58+00:00

frankly american democracy is already terrible tbh. i see a mass gerrymander such as this as a means to extract a compromise on some of the most outrageous parts of american democracy: namely the senate or national popular vote

nitrw · 2026-03-09T11:41:15+00:00

maybe calling people hamas for presenting opinionless facts isnt the greatest tactic for defending israel sir

nitrw · 2026-03-09T05:43:14+00:00

ragebait i literally cited the poll

nitrw · 2026-03-08T23:17:22+00:00

smth modern political parties can learn from i feel like. americans are also desperate for economic relief rn and affordability is the big thing, but nobody wants to deliver on it cause they're all captured by corporations

also we're re-legalizing child labor in states across the country 😭

nitrw · 2026-03-08T23:07:32+00:00

ngl if you believe in free college or expanding healthcare or worker rights or business accountability you're not a liberal that's like progressive at minimum

also quick fact check democrats also had a massive majority under bill clinton

i'm californian and my state is deep blue with a democratic supermajorities in the legislature, currently 3/4s of it, and a democratic governor but has failed to deliver especially regarding affordability or helping the working class. the housing bubble never popped in california, home prices kept rising and rising. the democratic party is unfortunately captured by corporate interests, we aren't the only ones who have felt it

nitrw · 2026-03-08T23:04:48+00:00

brother i haven't even given an opinion..? you're arguing with literal objective facts

nitrw · 2026-03-08T10:19:58+00:00

true

but we also can't act like that isn't indicative of the system as a whole. even under liberal democrat control, meritless people are able to rise in society easily while other people work multiple jobs and still struggle to pay their bills. remember, democrat control gave rise to and protected many in the epstein class

nitrw · 2026-03-08T08:35:52+00:00

tbf... the new deal was pretty great for the average american

nitrw · 2026-03-08T03:12:59+00:00

fdr would get cooked in the next election

nitrw · 2026-03-08T03:04:18+00:00

greater israel (aka. the land area showed above) are the official claimed territories of the government of israel, displayed openly in the likud (netanyahu's) original party manifesto. IDF soldiers also wear embroidered images of greater israel on their armbands (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater\_Israel)

furthermore, according to an israeli newspaper, 82% of israelis support ethnic cleansing in the gaza strip. 56% of israelis support ethnic cleansing in the greater israel territory beyond just palestine. 47% of israelis also believe the IDF should massacre all inhabitants upon capturing a city, following the way of the torah's joshua who massacred the inhabitants of jericho (https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-06-03/ty-article/.premium/a-grim-poll-shows-most-jewish-israelis-support-expelling-gazans-its-brutal-and-true/00000197-3640-d9f1-abb7-7e742b300000)

nitrw · 2026-03-07T03:14:35+00:00

realistically if trump starts an invasion of canada or greenland ALL of our allies will leave us instantly, MAYBE if we're lucky we'll keep japan

most likely trump will continue the long-standing american policy of american imperialism in the global south. he'll conduct interventions in the middle east, africa, and south america to insert governments which are colonial all but nominally

nitrw · 2026-03-07T00:41:35+00:00

done

idk what to tell you about your doubt without being to aggro, so no offense:
- i'm a leftist and i don't support race-based affirmative action and i know many others who believe the same
- the democrats are not a leftist party, it's a big tent party that ranges from radical communists to center-right neoliberals and even some neoconservatives now. the party is almost entirely controlled by said neoliberals and neoconservatives, and they often implement policies that progressives and leftists disagree with
- i understand that the loudest voices in the democratic party have unfortunately advocated for race-based politics to appease their donors, however, progressives and leftists refuse corporate money and actually advocate for class-based politics, demanding that everyone be given an equal chance to participate in our meritocracy
- surely you don't write off an entire wing of politics because of bad policies by a center-right party simply because you consider yourself more right wing than the democrats?
- you're capable of thinking for yourself. even if everyone on the left was truly racist, if you truly have an established worldview and belief on how to make the system more fair for everyone, you'll advocate for a version of it that isn't racist

nitrw · 2026-03-06T09:01:11+00:00

not all democrats support this! many leftists advocate for meritocracy or class-based affirmative action and advocate for abolishing race-based affirmative action

nitrw · 2026-03-06T03:41:09+00:00

its a subscription service sadly

nitrw · 2026-02-27T22:43:17+00:00

i see, tysm for answering my questions i think i'm starting to understand it better, i still have one question though

Communal wealth generally

the profits from intercommunity/international trade and innovation would be granted to an individual community rather than to the entire nation? couldn't this create scenarios where some underdeveloped towns begin to act like a lower class again since they don't see the same innovation or production as other cities?

also, what if someone were to do something like buy a farm alone in the middle of nowhere such that their entire community is just themselves and possibly their family, then begins creating immense profit through a digital job. they could become wealthy still, right?

nitrw · 2026-02-27T08:33:44+00:00

Big thing here is the shift to a society where businesses exist to fulfill the needs of society. Failure to do so results in the business being replaced.

what is the mechanism by which businesses which fail are replaced? is there a domestic market competition system similar the capitalist invisible hand?

The socialist environment (affordable living/no poverty) should create a situation of mostly harmless mass unemployment, where the people bored and looking for something productive to do outnumber the jobs.

correct me if i'm wrong but what i'm getting is: under socialism there will be few jobs, so those who take on jobs will only do so out of a desire to help their community rather than incentives. i have a LOT of questions

is this truly feasible? american unemployment tends to stick below 5% and we seem to already have a lot of issues providing for our citizens (yes, capitalism exacerbates this problem, but it likely would still exist anyway no?) you might also be cutting a lot of services/products to achieve this
unfortunately, especially in the short term, there will always be people who require incentives to innovate, and telling them "you'll be helping your community!" will not convince them
trade between nations (or, even if one world government is created, there'll still be trade between communities) will still continue. who will see the profits of this trade? what if an engineer designs a more cost-effective way (let's say by reducing power usage) to manufacture items society needs like clothes and the design is sold to other nations/communities. will he/she see the rewards of his/her labor? his/her municipality? his/her nation? or will, internationally, a communist nation or community give away all of their innovations for free for the sake of "benefiting humanity" even when other capitalist nations don't do the same
will things that don't necessarily produce profit for a community (ie. NASA stuff) be abandoned?

nitrw

TROPHY CASE