> So you don't reckon representative democracy works at all.
What do you mean by "works"? A violent dictatorship with a genocide here and there works perfectly fine, depending on your definition of "works".
> In which case what is there to talk about here?
Priorities. Should the priority be to discuss the importance of encryption. Or should the priority be to discuss the importance of means to influence decisions about encryption?
> You should be out attending to the business of revolution, not yakking on forums about incremental change right?
You mean literally losing a hand or an eye as a yellow vest? Or something like that? Nah. Meh, thanks. Not the best option I would say.
> Personally at present I think representative democracy is working,
Yeah. Again. I agree that it's "working". But without a definition of "working" or a benchmark that's an information-less statement.
> but that people are very dishonest about what they really want.
And you have hope that this will change?
People can't know what they want, if they aren't honestly informed about what's going on around them.
No need to go all the way to Hong Kong for examples. There's been plenty of violence by security forces with 100's of heavily wounded and a few deaths in the yellow vest protests in France recently. Here's a partial list up until January this year: https://www.liberation.fr/apps/2019/01/la-carte-des-gilets-j...
We're talking people losing their hand(s), eye(s) or dying here.
Same for the Barcelona protests (non yellow vests).
You'll have to search quite a bit to find articles on those if you live in "the West", but yeah they do happen.
On topic: if only Macron and Winnie the Pooh could somehow circumvent the encryption of those pesky protesters...
Well I admit working is a poor term. Perhaps framing it as "working for me" or "least scary for me" is more honest.
I'm more afraid of direct democracy than anything. I basically think I'll be dead within a few months of that emerging. Authoritarianism is my next greatest fear.
What do you mean by "works"? A violent dictatorship with a genocide here and there works perfectly fine, depending on your definition of "works".
> In which case what is there to talk about here?
Priorities. Should the priority be to discuss the importance of encryption. Or should the priority be to discuss the importance of means to influence decisions about encryption?
> You should be out attending to the business of revolution, not yakking on forums about incremental change right?
You mean literally losing a hand or an eye as a yellow vest? Or something like that? Nah. Meh, thanks. Not the best option I would say.
> Personally at present I think representative democracy is working,
Yeah. Again. I agree that it's "working". But without a definition of "working" or a benchmark that's an information-less statement.
> but that people are very dishonest about what they really want.
And you have hope that this will change?
People can't know what they want, if they aren't honestly informed about what's going on around them.