When is it time to leave a country becoming a dictatorship?

[Mardla]

But certainly the majority (including Cortez and Sanders) do not seem to actually understand socialism nor social democracy and just babble on about how Sweden and Denmark are socialist even though they obviously are not, and clearly not understanding or outright rejecting key parts of the systems in those countries (they would probably have a heart attack to learn the Nordic countries have conscription, and are pro business with a very high degree of economic freedom.

But to get back on topic Cortez and Sanders are not would be dictator Marxists Leninists.
Just clueless.

Nordic countries have monarchies and state churches, too!!!

Cosmetically

[Frievolk]

But certainly the majority (including Cortez and Sanders) do not seem to actually understand socialism nor social democracy and just babble on about how Sweden and Denmark are socialist even though they obviously are not, and clearly not understanding or outright rejecting key parts of the systems in those countries (they would probably have a heart attack to learn the Nordic countries have conscription, and are pro business with a very high degree of economic freedom.

But to get back on topic Cortez and Sanders are not would be dictator Marxists Leninists.
Just clueless.

Nordic countries have monarchies and state churches, too!!!

While I support a monarchy and a state-religion only in the form that appears in the Nordic Countries, I'm not quite sure you'd be fine with that form of state-religion and monarchy tbh.

[God Tere Norld]

Nordic countries have monarchies and state churches, too!!!

While I support a monarchy and a state-religion only in the form that appears in the Nordic Countries, I'm not quite sure you'd be fine with that form of state-religion and monarchy tbh.

Why do you support monarchy? That’s no better than a dictatorship! As a religious person I can tell you I wouldn’t support a monarchy under my religion, wich as a Roman Catholic there where a lot of

[Frievolk]

While I support a monarchy and a state-religion only in the form that appears in the Nordic Countries, I'm not quite sure you'd be fine with that form of state-religion and monarchy tbh.

Why do you support monarchy? That’s no better than a dictatorship! As a religious person I can tell you I wouldn’t support a monarchy under my religion, wich as a Roman Catholic there where a lot of

Bolded for further reference.

[God Tere Norld]

Why do you support monarchy? That’s no better than a dictatorship! As a religious person I can tell you I wouldn’t support a monarchy under my religion, wich as a Roman Catholic there where a lot of

Bolded for further reference.

Yeah I saw that! If the officials aren’t elected I dont really approve of it

[Frievolk]

Bolded for further reference.

Yeah I saw that! If the officials aren’t elected I dont really approve of it

...
I don't really care about whether or not you approve of what I consider an ideal form of government or not, if I am to be frank.

[God Tere Norld]

Yeah I saw that! If the officials aren’t elected I dont really approve of it

...
I don't really care about whether or not you approve of what I consider an ideal form of government or not, if I am to be frank.

I can respect that.

But tell me, why do you believe in it

[Frievolk]

...
I don't really care about whether or not you approve of what I consider an ideal form of government or not, if I am to be frank.

I can respect that.

But tell me, why do you believe in it

For one, because it's far more likely in the modern age to have a true democracy under a monarchy than it is under a republic. Because a non-partisan Head of State with minimal power that the moronic cult-of-personality supporters can obsess over is far better than the shitshow that is Popular Dictatorship under a republic. Because I prefer Parliamentarianism and it makes zero sense to have a Parliamentarian Republic. And of course, because of its aesthetics.

[Izaakia]

While I support a monarchy and a state-religion only in the form that appears in the Nordic Countries, I'm not quite sure you'd be fine with that form of state-religion and monarchy tbh.

Why do you support monarchy? That’s no better than a dictatorship! As a religious person I can tell you I wouldn’t support a monarchy under my religion, wich as a Roman Catholic there where a lot of

9 of the top 15 countries on the democracy index have a monarch, and therefore a state religion. So clearly not the same as a dictatorship.

[Frievolk]

Why do you support monarchy? That’s no better than a dictatorship! As a religious person I can tell you I wouldn’t support a monarchy under my religion, wich as a Roman Catholic there where a lot of

9 of the top 15 countries on the democracy index have a monarch, and therefore a state religion. So clearly not the same as a dictatorship.

It's more along the lines of 11 out of 19, actually, though I am not sure whether or not to trust an index that puts Spain as a True Democracy.

[Izaakia]

As soon as the government starts displaying:

Clamping down on personal freedoms

Clamping down on gun rights

Clamping down on speech

(Assuming its still a democracy at this point) Having a vote on making it illegal to leave the country

That’s a good sign that its becoming a dictatorship. Some countries do 2-3 of those things like the UK, but once its Having a vote on making it illegal to leave the country, or even an executive order in the US being planned, GO GO GO GO

Which ones, pray tell? And don't say the gun rights one, that option is invalid, since the UK never had gun rights in the first place; the 2nd Amendment is an American phenomenon.

We did have gun rights, if you’re Protestant, but yanno logically we saw a school shooting and thought, nah let’s not have another one of those.

[God Tere Norld]

I can respect that.

But tell me, why do you believe in it

For one, because it's far more likely in the modern age to have a true democracy under a monarchy than it is under a republic. Because a non-partisan Head of State with minimal power that the moronic cult-of-personality supporters can obsess over is far better than the shitshow that is Popular Dictatorship under a republic. Because I prefer Parliamentarianism and it makes zero sense to have a Parliamentarian Republic. And of course, because of its aesthetics.

Those are valid points, however what if the monarch is incompetent, what if they dont want to do their job. In democracy people at least have a say over who rules them

[Kakastania]

That can be disproved by America lol

Are you sure? Trump won after all.

Yes. True. Though some may oppose Trump, he won fairly.

[Trinadaed]

I wanted to go to Brazil.

For answering question, when the government starts to stricten their civil liberties.

[Frievolk]

For one, because it's far more likely in the modern age to have a true democracy under a monarchy than it is under a republic. Because a non-partisan Head of State with minimal power that the moronic cult-of-personality supporters can obsess over is far better than the shitshow that is Popular Dictatorship under a republic. Because I prefer Parliamentarianism and it makes zero sense to have a Parliamentarian Republic. And of course, because of its aesthetics.

Those are valid points, however what if the monarch is incompetent, what if they dont want to do their job. In democracy people at least have a say over who rules them

Once again, bolded for further reference.

[Izaakia]

9 of the top 15 countries on the democracy index have a monarch, and therefore a state religion. So clearly not the same as a dictatorship.

It's more along the lines of 11 out of 19, actually, though I am not sure whether or not to trust an index that puts Spain as a True Democracy.

Hey, let me bend stats to my point of view.
It counts America and France as not full democracies so can’t be too wrong. You’re right on Spain though, wouldn’t be surprised if that changed son.

[Izaakia]

Are you sure? Trump won after all.

Yes. True. Though some may oppose Trump, he won fairly.

Unless you count the popular vote where more people actually voted for his opponent by a fairly significant margin,

[The Sherpa Empire]

It's acceptable to leave a country at any time if you feel that you would be better off elsewhere.

Depending on the country's policy on absentee ballots, you might not need to stay in the country to vote in the next election. But even if the election laws say you need to be there in person to vote, I still wouldn't judge someone too harshly for deciding they'd rather vote with their feet.

[The New California Republic]

We did have gun rights, if you’re Protestant, but yanno logically we saw a school shooting and thought, nah let’s not have another one of those.

It was never a right though.

[Izaakia]

We did have gun rights, if you’re Protestant, but yanno logically we saw a school shooting and thought, nah let’s not have another one of those.

It was never a right though.

Bill of rights 1689, which reaffirms the ancient right to bear arms.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

When martial law is declared.

[The New California Republic]

It was never a right though.

Bill of rights 1689, which reaffirms the ancient right to bear arms.

Yes, but as you said, for protestants. It was never a general right à la The 2nd Amendment.

[Izaakia]

Bill of rights 1689, which reaffirms the ancient right to bear arms.

Yes, but as you said, for protestants. It was never a general right à la The 2nd Amendment.

It was a right for Protestants, but until 1870, you didn’t even need a licences to own one. Let’s not forget the U.K. is a Protestant nation and this right covered the majority. You’re second amendment is merely an extension of that right in the new nation. Your nation isn’t exactly the standard bearer or equal rights for all, or are we forgetting slavery and segregation?

[Trumptonium1]

Yes. True. Though some may oppose Trump, he won fairly.

Unless you count the popular vote where more people actually voted for his opponent by a fairly significant margin,

More people voted for Hitler than his next four opponents added together.

A lack of a beyond-the-popular-vote electoral system allowed him to rise to power.

[The New California Republic]

Yes, but as you said, for protestants. It was never a general right à la The 2nd Amendment.

It was a right for Protestants, but until 1870, you didn’t even need a licences to own one. Let’s not forget the U.K. is a Protestant nation and this right covered the majority.

That right would never have had any gravitas in modern law, even before the law was changed in response to the Dunblane massacre, so the point is entirely moot.

You’re second amendment is merely an extension of that right in the new nation. Your nation isn’t exactly the standard bearer or equal rights for all, or are we forgetting slavery and segregation?

I like how you assume what my nation is. You are way wide of the mark.