TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Do you believe in democracy?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Do you believe in democracy?

While watching the news yesterday I saw a British MP saying that one fourth of all Britains didn't know they were part of the EU. Even more worrying one in fifteen thought that the U.S. was a part of the EU.
Caught off guard by this startling information I started to wonder whether democracy is such a good idea after all. Should people be allowed to have influence if they do not live up to the responsibilities that come with it, such as acquiring enough information to make qualified decisions?

Here in Denmark we see politicians jumping each other to promise better healthcare, better conditions for the elderly and longer periods of maternity leave even though we already have pretty high standards in these matters. Nobody, however, talks about the importance of future problems such as drops in education standards and pollution of third world countries.
The reason why politicians do not touch these subjects is not because they are unaware of them, but rather that a minority of the population doesn't realize the importance of them, and this minority holds the balance of power during elections.
If democracy was limited in some way (e.g. longer election periods) maybe we could see more focus on things that matters in the long run and not indulgency to the common man who occasionally can't (afford to) see the bigger picture.
But then again maybe that is what is already happening in accumulating power in international organs such as the EU.

Any thoughts?

Good one!

i think democracy is great and necessary. We'd be naive to think that our votes and decisions make a difference anyway. Regardless of who gets voted to office, most of the stuff necessary to keep the country going will get done anyway.

If the morons that didn't know what the EU was voted for politician "A", doesn't mean politician "A" is going to be an idiot too. And that politican "A" didn't get there (into the polls) b/c he's a moron... he's probably pretty good at politics and a lot of people already supported him to get there.

All the really important decisions have nothing to do with popular vote anyway, so it doesn't matter

I predict Renegade, Raving Lunatic, and B.S.E. will reply to this thread

-ABT-

quote:

I predict Renegade, Raving Lunatic, and B.S.E. will reply to this thread

Heh, I'm that predictable then?

Well, the main issue with demoacracy is this: what's the difference between living in a dictatorship and living in a country where you can choose between one of two leaders, who rose fairly arbitrarily through the system (the public has no say in who the leader of either party is) and who have essentially the same attitudes and policies as each other anyway? In a dictatorship you have the choice of one individual, in democracy you have the choice of two, who hold identical ideologicies differing on only a few minor points.

What democracy does ensure, I guess, is "responsible government" (where if the government does something that the majoity of the public are unhappy with, then they will get voted out) which ensures that corruption or gross exploitation of power cannot really occur. But then, if both sides are guilty of the same things, where do you turn? If you think the politicians on both sides are lying, manipulative pigs who are interested in rising into power for the wrong reasons (i.e. power for power's sake instead of out of genuine concern for the public), who do you vote for? Do you waste you vote on a third party candidate? And what if he's exactly the same anyway? How much choice do we really have in the way our countries are run?

In someways it's our own fault. So many people lack the tools to assess the fundamental issues in an election, and either subserviently vote for the same party every election (out of habit or for any other reason - which defeats the point of responsible government when a party will uniformly be guaranteed at least a third of the vote, regardless of what they've done right or wrong, simply because they have so many stubborn, mindless supporters) or vote for the man ("ooo.... I like his attitude! What a sense of humour! Much better than that other boring git!") and not the policies ("Sorry, what's marketplace deregulation again?").

I'm not saying we should become anarchic, communinstic, totalitarianistic or anything else like that, I'm just saying that there are some serious flaws in the way politics is being conducted in many "democratic" nations, and not enough people quite understand the processes well enough. We need to better educate people, so they properly have the tools on how their country should be run. The only aim of the politician is to become as powerful as possible for as long as possible. There's nothing altruistic about them: even if an altruistic politician did turn up, the public would still be dumb enough to vote him out........ after all, who wants a man with morals managing our money!

I suggest you read Carl Sagan's Science as a Candle in the Dark trancaholic, it succeeds really well in pushing forward the notion that the public needs to be educated in rational, skeptical thought if society is to have any chance of bettering itself. For every intellignet man, voting for the right reasons or becoming politically active for the right reasons, there's 20 who aren't. The ingorant, unfortunately, usually have the strongest voice.

Now don't get me wrong. I believe in democracy and I believe in capitalism: but the problem is, democracy preaches freedom without responsibility. People under such systems have no obligation to be responsible for their fellow man, to be responsible for the caring of our planet and they certainly aren't responsible to learn anything. In an ideal world, we'd have these same systems of politics, but people would be educated and rational enough to make full use of them. We'd preach freedom and responsibility in commensurate chunks, such that people were free to do anything they wanted to, but had the cognitive tools to ensure they acted responsibly.

I don't know, I fear for humanity. Everything guided by the pursuit of money, and it's all beginning to suffer. Material hedonism and poor education (that is poor education in such doctrines as politics, philosophy, history etc.) make for a pretty grim picture. I do believe that democracy - in principle anyway - does work, but at the same time I don't think we're smart enough to know how to use it propery. To use an analogy, there's no point in owning a Porsche if you don't know how to drive.

Anyway, sorry if this post is a little strong. I'm tired and cranky and need a bed soon, and I'll probably revise some of the things I've said tomorrow.

Hope you all found this as enlightening as I did.

i say FUCK socialism...its like communism for noncommittal people! j/k

i dont know what to say here. there are benefits to EVERY type of govt, otherwise they wouldnt exist for long or be implemented. democracy is just the most agreeable because at least you GET a choice, regardless of how arbitrary it may be (or just seem). democracy in the US creates its own issues with class and prestigge, but im not sure thats a whole lot better than having a country where the health system suffers because there is no impetus to work for the extra education($$)....late/

i dont believe in any type of government i believe in guns

so u believe in the US government Vivid??

i live in a democratic country, and i luv the freedom, so yeah, im pro-democratic, i just voted for Democrats Beverwijk (local elections )

quote:

Originally posted by Gekhous so u believe in the US government Vivid?? i live in a democratic country, and i luv the freedom, so yeah, im pro-democratic, i just voted for Democrats Beverwijk (local elections )

i LOVE how the rest of the world thinks guns are thhe way everything is handled here...stop watching so much COPS! late/

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline I predict Renegade, Raving Lunatic, and B.S.E. will reply to this thread

I wouldn't go for a career as a fortune teller if I were you ABT
No, seriously - what's happened to RavingLunatic? Maybe I'm reading the wrong threads, but I haven't seen posts from him in a while now?!?

I tend to agree with Renegade (as I do in most non-spiritual matters) in that very few of the people running for office is doing it for anything but power itself. ABT, however, I'm a little shocked that you think that your vote doesn't really matter anyway. Why would you vote then? (and I know you voted for Bush, so don't tell me that you don't)

biz what are u talking abt all im saying is gimme a gun and the right target and ill make this world euphoric again

quote:

Originally posted by Vivid Boy biz what are u talking abt all im saying is gimme a gun and the right target and ill make this world euphoric again

hey dont make me pull out the D.E.! i wont negotiate here, i just shoot! late/

I like ancient athenian democracy... it forced people to pay attention to what was going on.

doesnt matter waht i believe
one belief doesnt change the damn system...
i wouldnt know what to say really...ive only been a citizen in a democratic country..capitalism, communism, monarchy blah blah all the systems have exitsed but apparently only this one remains standing isnt that supposed to hint something...although there are a lot of controversies which system wouldnt then?..theyre all too much of an idealistic system, the progress has always been about making it better.
argh
id like to go back to the barbaric ancient roman times

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic ABT, however, I'm a little shocked that you think that your vote doesn't really matter anyway. Why would you vote then? (and I know you voted for Bush, so don't tell me that you don't)

yes i voted for bush ...and you know it!

two things:
1) your votes technically don't count towards the election process.... your votes get added up by your district's electoral college and your electoral college representative decides on HIS vote (that counts) based on who was voted for in his district AND by what his personal decisions are. Now, this may sound kind of biased and faulty, but it works well and has served us well. (contrary to popular belief that they just add up all the cards and send the totals to washington.... they add up all the electoral college votes and send them in.) The issue they had with the voting problem in florida was a scandal under a few of the electoral colleges and they re-counted the publics votes, but when all was said and done, the votes that were affected by the mixup were only counting for 2 or 3 electoral college votes, which is why the outcome of the election wasn't affected.

2) the little help your vote does add to help the count for your electoral college doesn't really matter in this sense (i meant): Most politicians only differ on minute issues.... most of the general politics is the same (lower taxes, more education, blah blah blah).... and EVEN on the different issues, you have the system of checks and balances - 3 different powers.... the different branches are there to keep each other in check... and 9 times out of 10 the different branches are NOT controlled by the same party. Soooooo, say you have a really radical president (that you voted into place), and he tries to pass a bill (say "outlaw all guns"), that bill will never make it past congress.... vetoed right away. Say this same president did the same thing, but you hated him and you didn't vote for him.... still no worries.

So what i'm saying is, that your vote technically won't make that much of a difference b/c most of the policies that separate the beliefs of the two presidents are so miniscule OR so radical, they won't ever affect you.

And i can think of a million examples. The last time a dramatic law was passed that was against everyone's will was prohibition in the 30's... that was 80 years ago and failed miserably.... the US government hasn't had anything similar since.

Hope you got all that, sometimes i'm not the best at explaining....

-ABT-

I'm not American but a little lesson in the different type of Democracy...(a small sample, but I would suggest reading it all)

quote:

Representative Democracy in the United States The Unites States of America is a Federal Republic. Federal and state government choose officials based on the popular vote. This is commonly referred to as "representative democracy", and assumes voters choose candidates who represent their views. Voters can remove an elected official when their term is up by voting for someone else. Traditionally, candidates campaign by arguing the merits of their personal views on issues, and committing themselves to specific policies (if elected). Voters are expected to choose the candidate who's policies are closest to their own views (or at least the candidate who's views are the least offensive). After an election, the power vested by citizens in a public office is taken from those citizens and put in the hands of the winning candidate, who is free to govern based solely on self-interest (if they choose). The electorate does not expect them to govern according to the views of the individuals they serve, and who's office they occupy.

Source

I believe the Internet will eventually change the way we handle government since most opinion polls and votes are taken from a percentage of the people (sometimes less than half come election time).
With the Internet (once they perfect it) a very large sample can be collected and be a more accurate representation of the people, a Direct democracy as apposed to the Representative democracy of today.

Here are some definitions of democratic governments:

quote:

Democracy: "Rule by the many", especially majority rule. Used to refer to group decision-making by voting, with members getting one vote each. As a form of government, democracy can be applied several ways. Direct democracy: Group decision-making by direct vote. Easier with small groups who are in one place and all familiar with the issue being voted on. It can become more complex as a group gets larger, is more spread out, and requires information on the issue. Representative democracy Government by the majority vote of elected representatives who act as proxies, representing the will of their constituents. Designed to free the public from the responsibilities of the daily business of government without stripping them of political power. Democratic Dictatorship: A election by majority vote of a single ruler with absolute power, unconstrained by checks or balances. Democratic Oligarchy: The election by majority vote of a small group who holds power.

We really have to be specific when we mention "Democracy"...but I will say this, Democracy is not free and does come with a cost. Mostly at the cost of human lives defending what we so take for granted...

interesting question. I like democracy because its the best form of government you can get @ the moment, but its nowhere near as perfect as some people think. first of all in how many countrie do you can actually vote directly for decisions. As i recall Switzerland was the ONLY country who needed the "Yes" from the people to actually entry the UNO!!! But here we can also just decide in some questions not every political movement our government made. Add to that the public opinion can be "formed" and lead to one direction very well by installing a media campaign. the common man (or woman) does not take the time to inform himself the best possible way. He listen to a politician or read a nwespaper and thinks "oh this statement seems logical so it must be right" and doesnt look for other sources. Look what happened these days in the USA with that day for remember or that TV serie of CIA-activities, etc. And its not just happend in the USA it happen everywhere. As long as you have a lobby (the economie for example) behind your interest its easy to win even its "not right".

In conclusion: democracy is WAAAAYYYY overrated, but we have to find first a better state-form to replace it.

Oh and democracy function @best when it reigns only over a small region. Thats the reason Im not very sold of those multinational-buildups like the EU, where you (as the citizen) has absolutely no possibility to make decisions, you just have to thrust the politicians and thats a huge risk.

Give not to much power to a man!! That's not a socialist comment its just plain right as it lays in human nature to abuse the power!

quote:

Originally posted by cweb Give not to much power to a man!! That's not a socialist comment its just plain right as it lays in human nature to abuse the power!

Exactly...you just explained one of the issues with a Representative Democracy!

actually, a representative democracy would be better than a pure or direct democracy... IMO....

think about it... there are a LOT of fucking idiots walking around out there that shouldn't be allowed to breed much less breathe.... much less VOTE! I don't want the guy who can't tie his shoe having an "equal say" as me on the important issues....

thats how the representative democracy comes into its advantage....

....and there are a LOT of idiots out there....

-ABT-

True...but how do you determine who is fit to vote and who isn't?

maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...]

forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS.....
everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...)

man sometimes i'm good.

-ABT-

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...] forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS..... everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...) man sometimes i'm good. -ABT-

sounds good, but what about those friggin geniuses that cant hold their booze? one of these MIT mfers tops himself from alcohol poisoning, then what? plus who is to say that a certain IQ is necessary or reqd for certain things. i know 'smart' people that cant drive worth shit, and duumbasses that are practically prodigies...bounce/

ok....

how about :
"smart guys have shaved heads"

and

"stupid guys have short/long hair" ??????

LOL!!!! bwaaahahahahahahah!!!!

SHAVED HEAD RULES!

-ABT-

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline actually, a representative democracy would be better than a pure or direct democracy... IMO.... think about it... there are a LOT of fucking idiots walking around out there that shouldn't be allowed to breed much less breathe.... much less VOTE! I don't want the guy who can't tie his shoe having an "equal say" as me on the important issues.... thats how the representative democracy comes into its advantage.... ....and there are a LOT of idiots out there.... -ABT-

I disagree! of course you made some valid points. but what about the idiot elected as president? when you do not have a direct democracy he can almost do what he will. On the other side ther may be plenty of idiots in the "folk" but there also plenty of studied people, etc. who know whats going one. I think its way better to have a slow progress because you need the "yes" from the folk than blindly thrust a president and see what happen in 4 years.

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...] forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS..... everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...) man sometimes i'm good. -ABT-

I favour this idea! Maybe it could be refined, so that you got a questionaire like:

1: Do party X prefer nuclear power, windmills or fossile fuels?
2: Are you allowed to...
3: ...

Then you got as many votes as correctly guessed answers. Maybe I wouldn't be allowed many votes, but at least those who did would be people actually knowing and caring about what matters...

Or maybe we should pursue pure technocracy instead - at least that would prevent charming fools from gaining more power than they can handle

quote:

Originally posted by cweb I disagree! of course you made some valid points. but what about the idiot elected as president? when you do not have a direct democracy he can almost do what he will. On the other side ther may be plenty of idiots in the "folk" but there also plenty of studied people, etc. who know whats going one. I think its way better to have a slow progress because you need the "yes" from the folk than blindly thrust a president and see what happen in 4 years.

i disagree

anyone who is elected president is NOT an idiot... just b/c you may not agree with what he says/does doesn't mean he's an idiot! presidents are typically VERY smart, and here's why: you don't have to be a bookworm, you just have to REALLY be good at telling people what they want to hear, you have to be good at massaging the public. If you can do that and win popularity contests, you are by definition, a genius.

OK, so maybe presidents' aren't geniuses... but they sure as hell aren't idiots... and remember, we have 3 branches... even if we had an idiot president he wouldn't be able to get stupid shit passed....



-ABT-

I think there is a huge difference b/w candidates. If you look at most governments they might want the same things but their means of acheiving them are quite different. In the U.S democrats favor large government involvement and spending on social programs. Republican's while often wanting the same things want less government involvement and more personal accountability.
This causes a huge amount of difference in how social programs/the bureaucracy is funded and managed and thus there can be rather stark differences in government-citizen interaction, not to mention environmental and foreign policy. Liberals tend to be much more passive in foreign relations and active in environmental issues.

As for wheter democracy is needed or not I think it is. The people need to be running their own lives, not some dictator segragated from the population in his compound and out of touch with the common man and his problems. Socialism can exist but it has to be created from the will of the people not a few 'revolutionaries' who happen to have the military strength and enforce the will of the few upon the many.
As for worrying about idiots voting and screwing things up, most people who know nothing about the issues or have little concern in government won't be voting, those who do are for the most part well informed.

And yes, you're vote does count. Just because an electoral college exists for the presidential race doesn't mean that that is the only thing people vote on. In fact in everything but the US presidency the popular vote decideds the outcome. And voting is the only way to tell politicians that you ARE in fact holding them accountable for their actions while in office.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.