• HerrBeter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    NATO should’ve been put as a separate issue public vote, whatever it’s called in English. To make an international example, in the US they can vote for big shit or the lesser shit, so people vote for lesser shit, but that doesn’t mean they want lesser shit policies.

    Imo it’s a big wrangled to say we voted for this, when we vote for packages and our options are severely limited. Maybe you agree?

    • Vaniljkram@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We have representative democracy meaning we elect politicians to make decisions for us. While we do have the option to vote on single issue topics it’s unusual, and there are more and less suitable topics for the public to vote on. Voting on the NATO issue is probably the least suitable. Much of the basis for entering NATO are secrets not revealed to the public. And considering Russia managed to tamper with the us election, can you imagine what impact they could have on a vote like this?

      • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        We’ve had public votes for single issues before, like nuclear power, euro, and EU.

        Russian and in extension Chinese influence is mostly astroturfing opinions. They give money to entities like PragerU and others to push any conflicting information. Hence the MAGA cult.

        Better believe in information war, herr Vaniljkram, you’re in one.

        • Vaniljkram@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Did you want to explain why it would be a good idea to have a public vote on NATO?

          • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because then we’d at least have the option, and the people who are to be sent to wars get to actually weigh what they feel.

            It’s not perfect, but it’d be better

    • no banana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      What I meant was we did vote for the current government and their behaviour when it comes to financial policy is no surprise to me. In fact it is so unsurprising that I’m more surprised that anyone is surprised.

      Them being elected on the NATO question is kind of moot IMO since the Social Democrats already initiated. I think it’s fine to want to have a separate vote on the issue though I personally do not believe the public can be fully informed to make such a decision in our current world of nation states. That decision, and decisions on most national security issues, should be made on the basis of facts that you and I do not have access to.

      • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        You can apply that to any issue. People will often vote against their best interest but it shows whether or not it was wanted.

        My brother in Carl XVI Gustaf they obviously had better information that the plebian, but still systematically dismantled the military to five guys, a bucket, and a goat. I wouldn’t trust them to put their boots on the right foot

        • no banana@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          As I said, it’s fine to want the vote. I am not against it, but I’m not invested in it either. In the end our elected politicians are just human beings like all of us citizens, because they are citizens just like us. They’re bound to make mistakes like anyone else. Blind trust isn’t healthy but neither is contempt.

          • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Sure sure. I didn’t mean so. It’s just that we had multiple governments that apparently “didn’t see it coming” on anything.

            In gymnasium evidently we did a better world analysis after the Russian invasion of Crimea and subsequent illegal annexation. Placing Russian controlled agents of chaos and ruski green men in the Eastern regions.

            There was no question it would continue. Trump wants to get out of NATO, we’ll see how it ends. Not only this, but we have the CCP blatantly extending their territory and tricking other nations into shitty infrastructure deals that never amount to what’s promised.

            This rustles me so sorry if I’m just going on tangents

            • no banana@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              I don’t disagree that these issues are very real and have been for a long time. We just have to trust that human beings can change their outlook when they’re proven wrong and that our politics are starting to align with the reality of our eastern neighbor attacking countries.