Originally posted by squaccermanDemocracy has a lot of meanings.
Democracy is a great idea until you spend five minutes with the average voter. Discuss.
Democritus thought it should only apply to a vote by a male citizen who had been approved by the ruler.
What is democracy? In a world of 6+ billions, what does it mean? To be "democratic" is what?
I think that "democracy" is used to kill the individual. In more cases than not. Democracy is the notion that "we are all equal". Somehow. Magically equal. For this reason, it can be used to suppress and destroy our tribal enemies. Not a good thing.
If a group of people CONSENT TO BE GOVERNED by the rule of a freely elected tyrant for a space of a few years, then democracy MIGHT be a good thing. It all depends on the tyrant, doesn't it?
Venezuela "freely elected" a tyrant last year who proceeded to take away the very vote that brought him. Is this democracy? Or just tyranny by another euphemism?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI see one of the main problems with Democracy as being the repetitive mature of the beast. Politicians have to do what is popular to get re-elected, but popular is not always wise. Running countries is not easy, running a household or a company is tough enough, but as whole country. We don't understand what is best for us most of the time (probably right now it would be doubling the price of oil, and stopping everyone from breeding for a decade or two, but I digress), and we aren't going to like someone who does unpopular things, ergo we won't vote for them again, and so they won't do it in the first place. How about all politicians only being allowed to have one term in office at each level of the system?
Democracy has a lot of meanings.
Democritus thought it should only apply to a vote by a male citizen who had been approved by the ruler.
What is democracy? In a world of 6+ billions, what does it mean? To be "democratic" is what?
I think that "democracy" is used to kill the individual. In more cases than not. Democracy is the notion that " ...[text shortened]... ke away the very vote that brought him. Is this democracy? Or just tyranny by another euphemism?
Come on, roll up and spot the flaws....
Originally posted by squaccermanAs long as we have a scarcity economy, *all* forms of government are inherently flawed.
I see one of the main problems with Democracy as being the repetitive mature of the beast. Politicians have to do what is popular to get re-elected, but popular is not always wise. Running countries is not easy, running a household or a company is tough enough, but as whole country. We don't understand what is best for us most of the time (probably righ ...[text shortened]... o have one term in office at each level of the system?
Come on, roll up and spot the flaws....
Originally posted by squaccermanYou make some really good points.
I see one of the main problems with Democracy as being the repetitive mature of the beast. Politicians have to do what is popular to get re-elected, but popular is not always wise. Running countries is not easy, running a household or a company is tough enough, but as whole country. We don't understand what is best for us most of the time (probably righ ...[text shortened]... o have one term in office at each level of the system?
Come on, roll up and spot the flaws....
I argued with a guy last week when he called the recent election of Bush as the "attempt to establish an oligarchy" which is a govenment controled by a few individuals.
I pointed out how silly this was because we have elections every four years, and the new person always "cleans house" and puts in his/her own loyal chimps as the first matter of business.
Your term "running a government" is interesting. I don't think anyone but the carreer beaurocrats can do that. The "elected" chimps just kind of pretend for a few years and are gone back to collecting the graft they earned as chief chimp.
A true outright democracy maybe a dangerous thing, given the ebb and tide of public oppinion. This is even more apparent as we enter a time where the media packages politicians for us. I am quite happy that the framers of the constitution forsaw some of this and gave us a decent republic instead.
Nyxie
the Valkyrja
Originally posted by squaccermanSpecific to the problems of democracy, those reaching power do the the popular thing to get re-elected, there is no doubting that.
I see one of the main problems with Democracy as being the repetitive mature of the beast. Politicians have to do what is popular to get re-elected, but popular is not always wise. Running countries is not easy, running a household or a company is tough enough, but as whole country. We don't understand what is best for us most of the time (probably righ ...[text shortened]... o have one term in office at each level of the system?
Come on, roll up and spot the flaws....
For this reason no 'long-term view' is taken, because if it were this would begin with a slight dip in performance of {insert political policy hotspot e.g. education/healthcare here} which means when the next election comes around the opposition points out the bad state, ignoring the long term stratgey that is in place, but the public picks up on this and supports the opposition.
Sustainable development policies (which you could argue we need more than anything on a global scale) would need to be looked at as a long term view, but are unlikely to happen due to the above.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThat's the problem. I guess the people could vote... 😉🙄😉
Please elaborate. I'm especially interested in who will decide what the merits are and who will judge who has more merit.
Most, if not all, political systems are flawed. Right now I am struggling to think of a system that would work to please everyone.
Anarchy anyone?
It seems to me there are various points I would like to make:
One is being ruled by the majority opinion. Surely this is still better than being ruled by minority opinion?
Another is that "government" was set up by whom? By the rich and powerful of their day. Do you seriously think that these people created a system which wasn't going to benefit them?
Yet another is that there is a constant friction between a boss and a worker.
A boss wants to make as much profit as possible with a minimum of costs and a worker wants to earn as much as possible for the time he spends producing something. This leads to friction.
There are so many points that have to be made before we can judge democracy. To judge something, you must first have an idea of what you're talking about.
Attain the whole picture - Judge - decide
Some more points:
Big business decides government policies, not voters. All the voters in a country could vote for a party which wants to raise the minimum wage by 2 euros an hour. If all of business says to the government: "If you do that, we're moving our business to another country." Consessions are going to be made.
Big business (2% of the population) holds the majority to ransom.
Consessions to the producing classes only seriously came about after the Russian revolution. The "Owners", as they are called, then realised that you can only push people so far before they lash out like cornered rats.
So, every time the lid is about to blow they hand the producing classes little gifts like:
- A minimum wage
- Union rights
- Health service
- Education
The producing classes are then appeased and go about being productive for the Owners and the Owners then start nibbling away at the gifts they've given. Because these gifts chip away at their profits.
So union laws get weakened, health services get privatised and education gets dumbed down. Etc. etc.
These are only some examples to achieve the greater picture of what democracy is and how it is practised. I've looked at the picture for a long time and have come to some conclusions. Let me share them with you (since we're on the topic):
Democracy as it is practised is a farce. It's a method of making you think you are in control and living with the decisions which are made for you. It's basically a control mechanism. Feed the masses a little from time to time to stop the riots.
For democracy to truly work you have to look at politics on a global scale. You must be able to stop business moving from country to country to achieve ever cheaper labour. This means that the working-laws in every country and the pay packets have to be equal.
The media is too dumbed down and one-sided for democracy to work. As I have already suggested, to judge something you must first be able to achieve an as complete a picture as possible. This means you need equal information from all sides of a discussion.
This doesn't happen now. Take the war on Iraq as an example.
After weiging and judging, I decide that that the theory of democracy is good, but that the execution of it is terrible.
Originally posted by shavixmirThat's a really interesting post. It gives me a lot to think about.
It seems to me there are various points I would like to make:
One is being ruled by the majority opinion. Surely this is still better than being ruled by minority opinion?
Another is that "government" was set up by whom? By the rich and powerful of their day. Do you seriously think that these people created a system which wasn't going to benefit ...[text shortened]... that that the theory of democracy is good, but that the execution of it is terrible.
[/b]
Communism is a system of government that is great in theory and poor in practice. I think democracy works better in practice than communism. Do you think there's a system that works better in practice than democracy, Shavixmir?
Originally posted by AThousandYoung(I know this was adressed to Shavixmir)
That's a really interesting post. It gives me a lot to think about.
Communism is a system of government that is great in theory and poor in practice. I think democracy works better in practice than communism. Do you think there's a system that works better in practice than democracy, Shavixmir?
My earlier post about the short term view taken by political parties also applies to business leaders.
A Globally (semi)Altruistic Communist minded government might be a good place to start. Would be one big job to organise though, but not impossible if all were like minded.