Most Equal Komrads,

This highly original adaptation of electoral process is remarkable. If I have this right, the idea is to make votes for anyone other than the "chosen" candidate illegal and punishable by fine or incarceration. Brilliant. I wonder why no one else has ever thought of that? I'm sure this fair and equitable system will eliminate all of the strife and contention we experience with our current elections. The best part is that anyone that might question this system is self identifying as a Thought Criminal. Get those boxcars ready!

Red Salmon

I wonder... why don't they just don their swastika armbands and get it over with...

Minitrue wrote:I wonder... why don't they just don their swastika armbands and get it over with...

wahltjah.jpg

Pshaw. In one country where I was stationed during my stay in the People's Air Force, there was none of this folderol about marking ballots. The ballots handed out to voters were already marked, and all the voters had to do was drop them in the ballot box. And in true democratic fashion, all voters turned out to vote. If they were dilatory about doing so, the local constabulary were kind enough to show up at their doors and escort them to the polls. Now, this is the way to run an election!

Voting for Trump is Unconstitutional! Yeah! That's the ticket!

Let's roll over the Constitution!

Pamalinsky wrote:Voting for Trump is Unconstitutional! Yeah! That's the ticket!

Let's roll over the Constitution!

[OFF]

It's already been rolled over. One read of it and you'll know why. I read my pocket Constitution all the time and I feel like I'm reading the constitution of a foreign country.

It all makes sense once you realize that the Democrats live by and defend the Soviet Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution to them is what Comrade Stierlitz said: a foreign country.

Red Square wrote:It all makes sense once you realize that the Democrats live by and defend the Soviet Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution to them is what Comrade Stierlitz said: a foreign country.

[OFF]

I object. They're more extreme than that.

Read these Articles from the Soviet Constitution which go against Democrat policy. There are probably more, but I got bored reading about councils of ministers and presidia and premiers and supreme soviets and all of those other really official-sounding names for dictators and tyrants.

Of course, I recognize and acknowledge the massive gap between the Soviet Constitution and how the USSR really was. Just like I recognize and acknowledge the massive gap between the US Constitution and how our country really is!


Article 14. The source of the growth of social wealth and of the well-being of the people, and of each individual, is the labour, free from exploitation, of Soviet people.

The state exercises control over the measure of labour and of consumption in accordance with the principle of socialism: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work". It fixes the rate of taxation on taxable income.
Socially useful work and its results determine a person's status in society. By combining material and moral incentives and encouraging innovation and a creative attitude to work, the state helps transform labour into the prime vital need of every Soviet citizen.

Commentary: The Dems want free money with no work. They would object to Article 14.


Article 35. Women and men have equal rights in the USSR

Commentary: 3rd-wave Feminism, a core part of the Democratic program, goes beyond equal rights and demands female supremacy.


Article 49. Every citizen of the USSR has the right to submit proposals to state bodies and public organisations for improving their activity, and to criticise shortcomings in their work


Officials are obliged, within established time-limits, to examine citizens' proposals and requests, to reply to them, and to take appropriate action.
Persecution for criticism is prohibited. Persons guilty of such persecution shall be called to account.

Commentary: The Democrats want a state in which they rule and critique of their false and flawed policies is prohibited.


Article 53. The family enjoys the protection of the state


Marriage is based on the free consent of the woman and the man; the spouses are completely equal in their family relations.
The state helps the family by providing and developing a broad system of childcare institutions, by organising and improving communal services and public catering, by paying grants on the birth of a child, by providing children's allowances and benefits for large families, and other forms of family allowances and assistance.

Commentary: The Democrats are anti-family and would see this Article as not only being environmentally unfriendly, but also transphobic.


Article 96. Elections shall be universal: all citizens of the USSR who have reached the age of 18 shall have the right to vote and to be elected, with the exception of persons who have been certified insane.
To be eligible for election to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR a citizen of the USSR must have reached the age of 21.

Commentary: The Dems would want both ages to be lowered to 16, so that they can more easily elect and be elected by a populace still in the grips of the government brainwashing scheme that public education has become.

Red Square wrote:It all makes sense once you realize that the Democrats live by and defend the Soviet Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution to them is what Comrade Stierlitz said: a foreign country.

well, just dang it...the mythical horned rodent is just all kinds of con.fused. So, like there a.l.r.e.a.d.y. is a Constitution for this place??

Out here in the wilds of Texazistan the mythical horned rodent...and Ivan The Stakhonovets Ambassador can verify...well...there's this whole notion takin' over minds here...that we gotta cook up a Constitution from scratch. And here ya'll are talkin' about an already prepared Constitution that just needs reheating??

Ivan?? Trunk calling to Ivan, in Tractor Barn#2 from People's Pecan Farm #6. Just pop the prepared Constitution-role in hotwired toaster oven at 350º for an hour, and we're good to go.

All this gathering of ingredients from scratch is eatin' into serious productive time that could be spent down at distillery.

'pelipsky, over an' out
#BR 549

"Marriage is based on the free consent of the woman and the man..."

How narrow. How bigoted. How hateful. No wonder the USSR collapsed.

The main and the most beloved by the Democrats is Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution.

The leading and guiding force of the Soviet society and the nucleus of its political system, of all state organisations and public organisations, is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people.

The Communist Party, armed with Marxism-Leninism, determines the general perspectives of the development of society and the course of the home and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great constructive work of the Soviet people, and imparts a planned, systematic and theoretically substantiated character to their struggle for the victory of communism.

In the here and now, this would read:

The leading and guiding force of the American society and the nucleus of its political system, of all state organisations and public organisations, is the Democratic Party of the Unionized States. The DPUS exists for the people and serves the people. Etc.....

That is, voting against the Democrats, speaking against them, or imagining any other legitimate political entity in this country, is unconstitutional. It's also against The People™.

It's called a one-party system.

Red Square wrote:The leading and guiding force of the Soviet society and the nucleus of its political system, of all state organisations and public organisations, is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people.

The Communist Party, armed with Marxism-Leninism, determines the general perspectives of the development of society and the course of the home and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great constructive work of the Soviet people, and imparts a planned, systematic and theoretically substantiated character to their struggle for the victory of communism.

Modern statists in general are Hobbesians. They believe in his idea of the social contract: "i transfer my right to govern my life to X if you do too." You transfer your rights to the state so that it will govern you. Hobbes thought people are just plain bad and that freedom is dangerous. So you had to transfer your right to govern yourself to the state so that everyone could be safe from everyone else. That's the general idea of socialism in a nutshell. It's also the basic idea of the early Progressive movement, back when the Left was honest enough to be intellectually honest. The early Progressives thought the American experiment in self-government had failed - because freedom is dangerous, so we needed a new social contract to keep us safe from each other.

There's alot of different ideas on the Left about what makes people fundamentally bad and those form their different leftwing ideologies. But the thread running through it all is the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. There are just different ideas on what makes people bad and in need of the Leviathan to keep us safe from each other.

Hobbes doesn't get enough credit. But that's okay.

The Leviathan is happy to answer to any name that suits.