Large explosion in Beirut - hundreds reported injured

[Kowani]

Plus it's harder for many parties that share power to pull off major theft simply because its harder for them to come together for long enough to do major theft. If you have two parties, one is always going to hold the supermajority in government and that means controlling all the government offices and positions right down to the office clerks which are required to perform grand-theft-bridge. If it's 10 parties instead than that number is going to be closer to 5 and at worse 9. By the time you are done bribing, convincing, oppressing and generally making sure everyone is on board you stealing the bridge money it's just not worth it any more. So you tend to steal the small stuff you can get away with without all that effort.

Plus, the presence of multiple ideologically similar parties makes it more appealing for voters to punish corruption, because they won't be letting in "The Spawn of Satan" "The Second Coming of Hitler" "Literally Stalin" or whatever epithet is being used to denigrate the Other Party.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Corruption comes in many forms. But all of them are toxic to democracy. Either in the means to govern (taxes) or in the implementation of policy (spending), they make government less fit to its elected purpose.

Corruption can kill a democracy. When a significant percentage of the population are completely in despair of that "system of government" and the rest are not prepared to defend democracy, it can be overthrown. But with anyone of moderate or greater wealth accustomed to corruption, why would you expect a "benevolent" dictatorship or a transitional government to be any less corrupt?

Now a socialist dictatorship might solve the problem.

[Purpelia]

Bottom line is that democracy does not work. You have to make it work. And you have to keep it working. The moment you relax and allow it to run it self it begins its inevitable slide into despotism.

[Novus America]

And how will merely shifting a few parties around in the same corrupt system fix the corruption?
When corruption has reached such a critical mass that even the bodies meant to check corruption are completely corrupt, change from within the system is all but impossible.

Ask yourself what you could do in America, if both the major parties were intractably corrupt. Resist the urge to say "they are" because that would miss the point. Suppose most of the tax money was disappearing into private hands, it simply couldn't be traced. Serious corruption can't even be diagnosed, it looks to the people as though money just disappears. 10 million is budgeted to build a new bridge near your place. A fence is put up and bulldozers work for a few days. Some reinforcing steel is delivered to site. Then nothing happens for two years. Local criminals steal the reo steel. The fence falls down. And nobody knows what happened to 9.8 million dollars. What are you going to do about that? Are you going to elect the candidate who promises to fix the social security system and put an end to corruption? Or are you going to vote for the candidate who promises to cut taxes and put an end to corruption?

You need a third party. You need a candidate who promises to put an end to corruption full fucking stop. One whose reason for standing is to do that, and one prepared to be voted right back out if they don't.

With the relatively mild form of corruption the US has: where representatives are biased towards the interests that payed for their campaigns (or will give them lucrative board positions when they retire), the public demand for less corruption is not enough to raise up any third party to displace one of the Big Two. Your vote against corruption is quite futile, when representatives of both major party are beneficiaries of the corruption.

In my opinion, a proportional system is much better at rooting out corruption when it already exists. All it takes is 15 or 20% of the people voting specifically against corruption, and their party will have a choice of bigger parties to form coalition with. They won't root out corruption in one term, that's an unreasonable expectation if only a minority support them. That party will have to strike deals, they will have to tolerate some corruption in their senior partner, but when it comes to time to pass a major part of the senior partner's platform the anti-corruption party gets its quid pro quo.

Corruption is a hard problem. There are huge incentives to individuals, to be corrupt. And it spreads: an individual who becomes aware of it but does nothing, becomes corrupt themselves. They're going down if they're discovered, why not get their snout in the trough too?

A party which is specifically opposed to corruption will suffer, they'll be ganged up on (visited a prostitute? Guess what the prostitute was in the gang. Bought a cheap block of land? Hey, turns out the previous owner was a gangster). Noneless, starting small and getting bigger is the best way to power, for an anti-corruption party.

Multi-party is, for an end to corruption as in many other ways, better than Two Party.

Actually nonpartisan is best. Parties protect their own, and inevitably slide into corruption. Closed list proportional just gives more to the parties.

But as much as I find the US system two party system flawed and have a plan to deal with it what the hell does it have to do with Lebanon? Lebanon is far more corrupt yet has far more parties.

Lebanon has a ton of parties but they are all shit, and willing to overlook the corruption of others as long as others do the same for them.

Shuffling the parties around a little will do absolutely nothing to fix the problem. The parties must be disbanded and new parties built from scratch (if at all).

[Phoenicaea]

^i m not acknowledged about lebanon, so i can not say how to rewrite electoral law. we have to hear local citizens that wish to have care of it.

i claim i can say it for nation whose i belong nowadays, and given i say they share social and political similarities, i suppose somewhat that scheme.

quantity of parties not for me the cause, not necessarly they have to be two.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

[Rusozak]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

Let's just advertise to all the would-be terrorists where their targets have already made the bomb for them.

[Andsed]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

Lets hope this serves as a wake up call to properly store this shit so we dont get another accidental explosion.

[Ifreann]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

Ruh roh

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

Lets hope this serves as a wake up call to properly store this shit so we dont get another accidental explosion.

If they won’t use it, at least give it to the farmers. No place should share the same fate as Beirut’s port simply because of government incompetency (which is what happened).

And isn’t this number higher than the number of tonnes of ammonium nitrate that was stored in Beirut? If it did combust (I sincerely hope it does not), it would be even worse, because the healthcare infrastructure in Senegal sounds like it’s lesser than that of Lebanon and the blast would be larger because of the greater amount of ammonium nitrate fuel.

[Andsed]

Lets hope this serves as a wake up call to properly store this shit so we dont get another accidental explosion.

If they won’t use it, at least give it to the farmers. No place should share the same fate as Beirut’s port simply because of government incompetency (which is what happened).

And isn’t this number higher than the number of tonnes of ammonium nitrate that was stored in Beirut? If it did combust (I sincerely hope it does not), it would be even worse, because the healthcare infrastructure in Senegal sounds like it’s lesser than that of Lebanon and the blast would be larger because of the greater amount of ammonium nitrate fuel.

No Beirut had around 2,750 tons stored there.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

If they won’t use it, at least give it to the farmers. No place should share the same fate as Beirut’s port simply because of government incompetency (which is what happened).

And isn’t this number higher than the number of tonnes of ammonium nitrate that was stored in Beirut? If it did combust (I sincerely hope it does not), it would be even worse, because the healthcare infrastructure in Senegal sounds like it’s lesser than that of Lebanon and the blast would be larger because of the greater amount of ammonium nitrate fuel.

No Beirut had around 2,750 tons stored there.

Thanks for the clarification. So it’s 50 tonnes less. Article says that it would be moved to a location elsewhere in Senegal, but the warehouse hasn’t been properly checked.

The shipment was destined for Mali, but the government seems to be keeping it there as well.

[-Astoria-]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

*anxious monkey puppet*

[Kowani]

So apparently Dakar in Senegal has 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate in the port.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-53866103

Lets hope this serves as a wake up call to properly store this shit so we dont get another accidental explosion.

“ the first as tragedy, then as farce”