If you play a game of chess, you play with 16 pieces per side. If you play well, you win, if you play badly, you lose. Either way the player is accountable.
What one does not do is place extra pieces on the board, taken from someone else’s chess set, to subsidise bad playing or create an unfair advantage. That is essentially what mass immigration is, placing extra pieces on the board: broadly speaking, the Democrats/Labour Party/Left do it to import voters and gerrymander politics, and the Republicans/Conservatives do it to get cheap labour and/or ponzify the economy
The chess board the nation state, the player is the government, the pieces the people. So long as the population is sovereign, the government is accountable. But if the government (state or corporate) can choose whatever population it likes, by importing new people and displacing existing ones, it is unaccountable
Trump is essentially enforcing the rules of chess and bringing government to order. The globalists want to destroy the nation state, so they have unaccountable control
In a sense, it is unfortunate most forum participants chose to discuss irrelevant topics, such immigration policy or their paranoia about Muslims, instead of talking about the implications of Nu being a democratic simulation. It shows their priority isn’t building the network. In the course of the discussion, quite a few authoritarian tendencies were revealed as well. These destructive tendencies that were revealed will be instructive to NuShare holders, who have a strong financial interest in making sure authoritarians have no power within the network, particularly in the role of custodians.
I’m not interested in Islam or a discussion about it.
Nu’s major failure has been to appoint a significant number of authoritarian custodians in the past. These custodians felt fear on May 27th when ~100,000 US-NBT were sold. I wasn’t concerned because I understood the liquidity model was well equipped to handle this. Most others didn’t understand its capacity or how it worked. So there was a lot of fear. When authoritarians experience fear, they are apt to change all the rules. When fearful, they say “This crisis was not foreseen. Therefore, the laws made before the crisis are of no use. We need to change the way we operate due to the crisis, suspending law. I will decide what the changes will be.” This is what Nu’s Chinese and American authoritarian custodians did. Authoritarian actions in a crisis created by their own fear tend to be cruel, socially disconnected and generally destructive. We can certainly characterize the abandonment of the NuBit peg as cruel, socially disconnected and generally destructive. It was classic authoritarianism.
So when NuShare holders look for authoritarian tendencies in people’s communications, we should look for appeals to fear. We look for appeals to suspend the rule of law because of some pressing or unforeseen reason. They like a strong man father figure. There is a contempt for the foundational democratic principle of equality of people (who in our simulation are NuShares or NuCitizens). There is a fear of outsiders. There are quite a few comments in this thread exhibiting these authoritarian orientations. It is good for NuShare holders to understand this.
Your decided how to use the B&C BTC fund without any motion and decided to filter out the NSR stolen recently. I guess you also have some tendency of authoritarian.
democratic principle of equality of people… that’s the problem of democracy. Before a doctor put a knife on his patient, before an engineer making a decision on a project, they need to be trained and get qualification. Before a NSR holder vote for NSR buyback, they need to know the meaning of it. Therefore, before a Citizen vote to influence one country’s future, they need to be wise/mature enough. We cannot have ISIS to vote for our country’s future because they will drag us to middle age.
The DASH has main node who must have 1000+ DASH, that’s the important reason of their success, but it’s not of equality, those have less 1000 DASH cannot be the main nodes.
F. A Hayek was also a sociologist, his opinion on democracy suggests that this issue is just not so simple as “letting everyone just vote equally”. Don’t forget Hayek was a dead enemy of Soviet Union dictatorship, but that doesn’t mean he goes to another extreme.
In fact, the Founding Fathers of the United State，also disliked so called "Direct election“ which is NOT USA’s democracy method.