Does democracy work?

american "democracy" sure as hell doesn't

 

It is clear that people do not understand democracy. If you are to have a government, then you either have majority rule like in democracy, or minority rules. Most of the world is minority rule and the minority is usually a rich elite.

For instance, US has a republic federated constitutional government. Do you think a republic form of government has an advantage over democracy? I do not see it. If we had a republic form of government, but didn't have a constitution that protected rights, then we will have a government that steps on rights just as any other form.

Similarly we can have a direct democracy with a constitution that protects rights. This kind of system in my opinion is ideal. However, it can only work if we have democracy through and through including our workspaces.

The definition of being arrogant is thinking people are worse than you OR better than you. The fact is we are not only bad at judging people, we are terrible. This is why a republic form of government does not work.

Ironically many people here trust "professional" politicians who they do not know but do not trust their neighbor who they do know.

I think it can be agreed here that no form of government is best. And when people need to do things as a collective, people all agreeing on what to do is best (which is direct democracy).

In fact, i do not see any danger of direct democracy if you have a federated constitutionally based system.

 

does democracy imply capitalism?

 

Those are the joys of democracy. The individual is the one one had for lunch...

 

Aristotle, like Plato, was very interested in the different types of government. He devotes Books 4 through 8 of Politics to the different kinds of government, which ones are best, and what the “ideal city” is. He criticizes many forms of government, such as kingship, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, and democracy. He doesn’t really agree with Plato’s ideas on government, but they both do agree on the fact that they don’t like democracy. This is surprising to me as an American because we hold democracy in such high esteem. I realize that Aristotle’s definition of democracy is different from what I would consider modern democracy to be. He spoke of a union between the oligarchy and democracy.

Aristotle uses democracy to mean rule by the people, which are mostly the poor, in their own interest. He faults this because they do not have the skills to rule a country so the country is weak and disorganized because too many people are trying to run it and they are not qualified.

In his union of oligarchy and democracy all citizens would take turns in political office so no one person who wasn't qualified would be the end all to any one thing.

If you cannot have a perfect government, then you might as well try to get everyone to contribute. This is the truest essence of what it is to be a "citizen"

 

Not under the Obama administration.

 

I agree with Churchhill on that one. All government systems suck, because you have to give up so much power to the man.

 

Truth. You will think the way you are told.

 

American Democracy used to work quite well, but somewhere we got confused and fucked up.

 

Those that said "No", I would like to hear your proposal for a better idea. What government system on this planet does work.

 

Democracy works perfectly according to what it's supposed to do. Effectively establish the wishes of the majority.

Democracy sucks for the one enlightened being who has all the answers to the universe. It's perfect for a city who wants to pass legislation for a 100ft. wide plasma t.v.

And that is the only thing it's good for. If we had Kings, who had to take a King Exam to become king, and who had an instant death chip implant that was activated by a 3x majority democratic vote of the nation, then maybe Kingship could be a great. It would sure allow more effective and instant control over resources.

 

Governments are simply a necessary evil, something that many, if not most people, would prefer to do without, if only they could.
All governments on this planet work, at least to the satisfaction of those who control them.
The difficulty in proposing a better idea is that it is inconceivable that one could be proposed which would be satisfactory to all those it would apply to. Many would prefer less government, while there are many who would prefer more. Many persons are quite content in taking full responsibility for their own lives, regardless of how much or how little they may have. Many others would prefer to have responsibility for their shortcomings or inabilities passed on and imposed on others who they view as having more than their fair share.
Governments primarily attempt to maintain a status quo which results in a society which can be controlled relatively peacefully, making changes they feel necessary to maintain or strengthen the acceptance of the Government and of those running it.

 

Democracy in the United States has failed the people. As far as major corporations go it seems they have most of the power, and that means that our Government is serving Big Bussiness. I also believe that the rich, and groups of rich people (corps) have been controlling the way most things work in the world, in order to advance their causes. If you dont know its to keep them going and to become more wealthy over very long periods of time. Some already think that they will soon be able to openly control countries.

 

Business and corporations operate within the laws we allow the politicians power to pass. Politicians need money to finance their election/reelection campaigns. Those with money provide much of the contributions and therefore receive the attention that most assures they will continue to provide their support.
Contributions purchase the politicians who then govern by passing or changing laws in ways that remunerate their contributors, and fund programs desirable to the voters and paid for with their taxes or an increasing National Debt.
I waiting to see when we will have finally spent our way out of debt.

 

HAHA, I would like to give that I try

 

Some corporations can control local governments through lobbying already. And Coca-Cola or McDonald's might be able to push around the governments of Paraguay or San Marino or some other little country. The government should have more regulatory control to make sure people don't get hurt or harmed due to the effects of the company.

But other wise Democracy works in the USA. The government would do well to get their noses out of our affairs. And we should have more control over them, not viceversa.

 

No because all the rich white people rather than the masses run things.

 

"No because all the rich white people rather than the masses run things."

Assuming you consider yourself one of the masses, how would you propose things should be run?

 

I meant that more people should be more involved in the political process, like voting and thinking about their local problems. (I'm not a commie! ) The missing ballots in Florida is an example of democracy gone haywire.

 

I wasn't trying to call you a commie, and I think you have a point, primarily in pointing out that more people should be thinking about solving their local problems. Sometimes you can find that the National government gets too deeply involved in what they see as a National problem, and can create solutions which have varying effects within different states. This is why I think the states should be allowed to retain some sovereign rights as often federal fixes can put financial burdens on states which they can not afford. Federal funding often comes with strings attached that allow the state to receive needed aid promptly, while creating a perpetual expense for the state as a result, forcing the state to increase its taxes. Eventually this results, if it has not already done so, in states having to relinquish much authority to the federal government as the means of control since it is the only way to get the funds required, which at the same time demands control as well.