NationStates Jolt Archive

I think it is. Nevertheless all other governmental systems are worse.
Well just two reasons:
1. People decide things their children will be effected by.
(Libertarians want the environment screwed, many others do not care about the fact that the state spends to much money and their children will have to pay for that.)

2. People mainly decide on the basis of daily news. If a few days a rapist was caught, they are for death penalty. If it is revealed that a inncent man was about being executed and is freed now, they are against it.

"Is democracy bad?"

Hahahahahahahaha! Ahahahahahahahahahaha! :D Oh wait, you weren't joking.

Ask a silly question...

We can switch to technocracy.
The machine efficency will save us...
Oh wait, someone tells me it can be screwed up too...

We can switch to technocracy.
The machine efficency will save us...
Oh wait, someone tells me it can be screwed up too...
Ever seen The Matrix? Technocracy will be the downfall of mankind.

We can switch to technocracy.
The machine efficency will save us...
Oh wait, someone tells me it can be screwed up too...

Just read what I said:
Democracy IS the best type of govermental system!
But it does have quite a lot of faults.
Nevertheless it is "worshiped" as though it was perfect.

Technocracy works untill the Computer revolts.


Democracy isn't the best, its the least worst.

Technocracy works untill the Computer revolts.


Democracy isn't the best, its the least worst.

Agreed.

I don't think any one political system can please everybody,however i think currently democracy in our world is the most viable and stable form of government there is right now and ur comment about people deciding on subjects that future generations will have to live with well by the vary nature of democracy laws change over time with governments either being elected or the opposite lose office responding to the current strength of political opinion.

Ever seen The Matrix? Technocracy will be the downfall of mankind.
Makes it even more desirable... :rolleyes:

I don't think any one political system can please everybody,however i think currently democracy in our world is the most viable and stable form of government there is right now and ur comment about people deciding on subjects that future generations will have to live with well by the vary nature of democracy laws change over time with governments either being elected or the opposite lose office responding to the current strength of political opinion.

Of course laws do change, but I was rather thinking about pollution of the environment (esp. Bush's policy), if it is not restricted by laws and thus effecting future generations, and about deficit spending forcing future generations to pay what their parents spent.

Let me explain to you why democracy is bad for all freedom-loving individuals...

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a REPUBLICAN form of government -- NOT a democracy. Our leaders are lying to us whenever they make the claim that we have a democracy. The United States was not set up to be a democracy. It was established as a representative republic. There IS a difference!

Citizens in democracies are easily subject to manipulation. Whenever people figure that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, they always will. Therefore, democracies always lead to socialism, which is the main ingredient to communism.

Socialism puts government in control. Democracies are always socialist in nature, because they are dedicated to controlling the people by the purse, rather than allowing people the freedom to fend for themselves and, therefore, be free. Democracies are governments by mob-rule.

Our leaders say the U.S. is spreading democracy around the world. They are engaged in overthrowing governments and setting up "democracies" in their place. The people have been brainwashed to believe that democracies are our constitutional form of government. That is not true. The governments that our leaders are setting up around the world are easily subject to control, because they are socialistic in nature.

If you still don't believe me, read the people who know:

"The ultimate goal of socialism is communism." --Karl Marx & V.I. Lenin

"Democracy is the road to socialism." --Karl Marx

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism." --V. I. Lenin

"It's my conviction that the human race has entered a stage where we are all dependent on each other. No other country or nation should be regarded in total separation from another, let alone pitted against another. That's what our communist vocabulary calls internationalism and it means promoting universal human values." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"...I would like to be clearly understood...we, the Soviet people, are for socialism.... We want more socialism and, therefore, more democracy." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"We will proceed toward better socialism rather than away from it. We are saying this honestly, without trying to fool our own people or the world. Any hopes that we will begin to build a different, non-socialist society and go over to the other camp are unrealistic and futile. Those in the West who expect us to give up socialism will be disappointed." --Mikhail Gorbachev, in "Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World," 1988

"I am a Communist, a convinced Communist! For some that may be a fantasy. But to me it is my main goal." --Mikhail Gorbachev, New York Times, 1989

"Those who hope that we shall move away from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed. Every part of our program of perestroika...is fully based on the principle of more socialism and more democracy." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"Democracy: A goverment of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of 'direct' expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic -- negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, ... without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy. --Army Training Manual Concerning Citizenship, 1928

"Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the left is going to change that.... The words Economic Democracy are an adequate and effective replacement." --Derek Shearer, cited in Reason, 1982

The U.S.A. has implemented all ten planks (http://www.restoringamerica.org/documents/10planks.html) of the Communist Manifesto, and yet the American people are so dumbed down that they have no clue that they are no longer living in a free country.

I'll share with you one more quote, and then I'm done.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." --Johann W. von Goethe

The U.S.A. has implemented all ten planks (http://www.restoringamerica.org/documents/10planks.html) of the Communist Manifesto, and yet the American people are so dumbed down that they have no clue that they are no longer living in a free country.
What?
The US has abolished private property?
Definately not...

Also, I believe you are misreading the quotes relating socialism to communism, they are saying that those people are using socialism as a route to communism, not that it invariably results in it.

On top of that, you never demonstrated why socialism and communism are so bad as you seems to claim.

EDIT:
Hee, that website you linked to was one of the ones that claims the Democrats are under the control of communists.
Great humour.

Shouldn't this be a poll?

representative democracy is overrated, its just elected dictators. true democracy is good but only exists in a couple communities

Democracy is only bad when freedom and personal responsibility are removed from it.

(Libertarians want the environment screwed

? And the rationale behind this statement is...

? And the rationale behind this statement is...I suppose that libertarians allow more economic freedom, which allows companies to ruin the ozone…

Although really it's offensive to me, a Libertarian Expansionist. Isn't someone going to ask me to define this? To believe that members of my politics want to destroy the environment? I believe we should be doing more to protect the environment! Control carbon dioxide emissions now!

? And the rationale behind this statement is...I suppose that libertarians allow more economic freedom, which allows companies to ruin the ozone…

Although really it's offensive to me, a Libertarian Expansionist. Isn't someone going to ask me to define this? To believe that members of my politics want to destroy the environment? I believe we should be doing more to protect the environment! Control carbon dioxide emissions now!

Let me explain to you why democracy is bad for all freedom-loving individuals...

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a REPUBLICAN form of government -- NOT a democracy. Our leaders are lying to us whenever they make the claim that we have a democracy. The United States was not set up to be a democracy. It was established as a representative republic. There IS a difference!

Citizens in democracies are easily subject to manipulation. Whenever people figure that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, they always will. Therefore, democracies always lead to socialism, which is the main ingredient to communism.

Socialism puts government in control. Democracies are always socialist in nature, because they are dedicated to controlling the people by the purse, rather than allowing people the freedom to fend for themselves and, therefore, be free. Democracies are governments by mob-rule.

Our leaders say the U.S. is spreading democracy around the world. They are engaged in overthrowing governments and setting up "democracies" in their place. The people have been brainwashed to believe that democracies are our constitutional form of government. That is not true. The governments that our leaders are setting up around the world are easily subject to control, because they are socialistic in nature.

If you still don't believe me, read the people who know:

"The ultimate goal of socialism is communism." --Karl Marx & V.I. Lenin

"Democracy is the road to socialism." --Karl Marx

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism." --V. I. Lenin

"It's my conviction that the human race has entered a stage where we are all dependent on each other. No other country or nation should be regarded in total separation from another, let alone pitted against another. That's what our communist vocabulary calls internationalism and it means promoting universal human values." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"...I would like to be clearly understood...we, the Soviet people, are for socialism.... We want more socialism and, therefore, more democracy." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"We will proceed toward better socialism rather than away from it. We are saying this honestly, without trying to fool our own people or the world. Any hopes that we will begin to build a different, non-socialist society and go over to the other camp are unrealistic and futile. Those in the West who expect us to give up socialism will be disappointed." --Mikhail Gorbachev, in "Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World," 1988

"I am a Communist, a convinced Communist! For some that may be a fantasy. But to me it is my main goal." --Mikhail Gorbachev, New York Times, 1989

"Those who hope that we shall move away from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed. Every part of our program of perestroika...is fully based on the principle of more socialism and more democracy." --Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1988

"Democracy: A goverment of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of 'direct' expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic -- negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, ... without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy. --Army Training Manual Concerning Citizenship, 1928

"Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the left is going to change that.... The words Economic Democracy are an adequate and effective replacement." --Derek Shearer, cited in Reason, 1982

The U.S.A. has implemented all ten planks (http://www.restoringamerica.org/documents/10planks.html) of the Communist Manifesto, and yet the American people are so dumbed down that they have no clue that they are no longer living in a free country.

I'll share with you one more quote, and then I'm done.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." --Johann W. von Goethe
There are MANY serious flaws in what you are saying.

One is that you start out saying that The American Republic is not a democracy. It is one, a democratic republic. It is possible to have a republic where then next guy of a blood line is an area's representative and the primary leader is chosen by a lottery .

Another is you say democracies lead to socialism which is a main ingredient in communism as if the first part was bad. Communism is bad under the premise that every one of them has crashed and burned or is crashing and burning, but socialism, when brought about by democracy, is good, if 51% want it, then they get it. Which leads us to the mob rule point. Democracy oversimplified is mob rule, the more win over the less, mob rule like this is the best currently functioning system. As well with the socialism being a part of communism, it is, but in communism there is an ultimate end where things just get done, nothing like democracy.

And the totally out of context quotes. You quote Marx, Lenin and Gorbachev, Communist leaders that said these quotes to gain and secure their following. And that quote from the army training manual is just that, a quote from an army training manual. It was written to teach a soldier about how to think in a manner that would make him willing to follow orders and be obedient.

May I ask you what is a good form of government?

I suppose that libertarians allow more economic freedom, which allows companies to ruin the ozone…

Although really it's offensive to me, a Libertarian Expansionist. Isn't someone going to ask me to define this? To believe that members of my politics want to destroy the environment? I believe we should be doing more to protect the environment! Control carbon dioxide emissions now!
Don't you know? Anyone who thinks people should take responsibility for their own personal freedom and well being is a capitalist pigdog environment-raper!

Citizens in democracies are easily subject to manipulation. Whenever people figure that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, they always will. Therefore, democracies always lead to socialism, which is the main ingredient to communism.

You need some more statements to support this logical deduction. As it is, it doesn't make sense.

Socialism puts government in control. Democracies are always socialist in nature, because they are dedicated to controlling the people by the purse, rather than allowing people the freedom to fend for themselves and, therefore, be free. Democracies are governments by mob-rule.

I understand the last statement, but the entire beginning to this paragraph is jumbled nonsense. Please explain more.

Our leaders say the U.S. is spreading democracy around the world. They are engaged in overthrowing governments and setting up "democracies" in their place. The people have been brainwashed to believe that democracies are our constitutional form of government. That is not true. The governments that our leaders are setting up around the world are easily subject to control, because they are socialistic in nature.

Empty unbacked statements.

As for the quotes, none equated democracy with communism (outside the 1928 training manual), all of them stated that the democracy must be maintained to support communism.

As for the 1928 quote, how does a democratic system negate property rights?

I suppose that libertarians allow more economic freedom, which allows companies to ruin the ozone…

Although really it's offensive to me, a Libertarian Expansionist. Isn't someone going to ask me to define this? To believe that members of my politics want to destroy the environment? I believe we should be doing more to protect the environment! Control carbon dioxide emissions now!

How about complete liability for offending corporations? Let the public use the judicial system to keep corporations accountable, thats what it is there for.

People in general are too stupid to vote. If you can find a way to get by that, democracy is great!

Citizens in democracies are easily subject to manipulation. Whenever people figure that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, they always will. Therefore, democracies always lead to socialism, which is the main ingredient to communism.
I keep trying to make sense of this statement. You're saying that whenever people figure they can get something good out of the deal of electing someone, they will. Now, that doesn't sound like socialism to me. In socialism, the means of producing and distributing goods are owned by the collective...how does economic darwinism result in such? The more people vote on an individual basis in order to increase their individual status, the less they are contributing and the more they are taking away from the collective, resulting in a loss of power towards the ideals of socialism. Perhaps I'm just not understanding what you've said?

Of course manipulation is possible, pretty much inevitable in democracies just as much as in other governments. Democracy however plays on the idea of collectively overthrowing a decision made by a single person when the public comes to the realization that the manipulation is not resulting in benefits. In the U.S. this occurs by electing someone who we can only hope will take stand and strike down the causes and eventually the effects of the manipulations. The problem that one might see in this method is that there is no guarantee that the person elected will overthrow the laws, but that's why we keep things such as impeachment in place.

Democracy is the best, yes, but at the same time not all that great. In a way it's just an extension of a dictatorship, just with controlled revolutions called elections as opposed to physical ones. It's just the result of humanity's inevitable efforts to streamline the processes we go through, government being one of them. Such as the matter of representation as opposed to direct democracy. With direct democracy, it takes alot more effort to get things done, and where we might trade off the gaurantee that the will of the people will dictate our laws, it's safe enough to expect that eventually the opinions of the proletariat will come to light within representation, and as such we can go about other jobs than voting 24/7. This is more efficient and allows for a more ludicrous lifestyle, so we tend to prefer it unless the ability to eventually overthrow those in power becomes threatened.

Looking back that got a little off topic, but you get the idea.

Since this topic relates to it I'd like to suggest a book for everyone reading this thread.

The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad by Fareed Zakaria. A nice book with some very interesting views.

If you are talking about the U.S.
When the people directly vote on government action, thats a democracy.
When people elect leaders to vote on government action we call that a republic.
When people choose between two parties who mostly agree with each other on how to fuck the people and between the two of them controll all major media so that any opinion outside of the two party spectrum is ignored, and the people(atleast those that havn't run afoul of the law) don't vote for their leaders, but rather elect the people who will elect their leaders, and those leaders have vast authority to propagandize the people with the peoples own money, and 2,000,000 of those people are in prison and corrections is a growth idustry, we call that many things, mostly profane, and none of them are 'democracy'.

Don't you know? Anyone who thinks people should take responsibility for their own personal freedom and well being is a capitalist pigdog environment-raper!

Personal freedom does not lead to pollution of the environment. And in all Western countries people are responsible for their well being. Latter thing is a principle of capitalism, which is know to be the best working economic system.
But your own personal freedom ends where others' personal freedom is being limited. Very simple example: Nearly no one thinks personal freedom includes murder of someone else.
Polluting the environment to such an extend that others will become ill or the whole ecologic system might collapse is just that: Limiting other persons' freedoms.

Ever seen The Matrix? Technocracy will be the downfall of mankind.

Actually the machines in the Matrix weren't evil or powerhungry... they just wanted to exist, and we (as humans) wanted to destroy them....

I suppose that libertarians allow more economic freedom, which allows companies to ruin the ozone…

Although really it's offensive to me, a Libertarian Expansionist. Isn't someone going to ask me to define this? To believe that members of my politics want to destroy the environment? I believe we should be doing more to protect the environment! Control carbon dioxide emissions now!


Of course they do NOT really WANT the environent ruined. (I was just exaggerating.) But the point is many libertarians (e.g. Bush as far as protection of the environment is concerned is libertarian) simply do NOT CARE. If you do, libertarians (I am especially thinking of some German ones) should be more like you.

Ah, hell, this started out as a nice (and intelligent) debate over the pros and cons of a computer (or robot, why not, robots are nice too) controled world, and then it degraded into some poppycock about "fweedom" and "wibewty" and "demokwacy" :D
WOTE BENDER! :D

People in general are too stupid to vote. If you can find a way to get by that, democracy is great!
What did you choose at the "Democracy Going to the Dogs"-Issue? ;)

Actually the machines in the Matrix weren't evil or powerhungry... they just wanted to exist, and we (as humans) wanted to destroy them....
Indeed, it were the humans who darkened the sky - a ruthless and short-sighted action that did not only destroyed the source of power for the machines but for all other life on eath, too - typical... :rolleyes:

I think it is. Nevertheless all other governmental systems are worse.
Well just two reasons:
1. People decide things their children will be effected by.
(Libertarians want the environment screwed, many others do not care about the fact that the state spends to much money and their children will have to pay for that.)

2. People mainly decide on the basis of daily news. If a few days a rapist was caught, they are for death penalty. If it is revealed that a inncent man was about being executed and is freed now, they are against it.

Well democracy isn't that bad. The people are just not ready for it. To have a good, working democracy, people have to be interested in what happens. They must check the news everywhere, not only on FOX or CNN, where the news are controlled by government. They must read a lot, be educated, and be the watchdogs of the govt.

But nowadays, the youth have no interest in these. I think a good democracy would work if we'd change our values. Socialist values, for example. We should accept to pay more taxes, so there are less riches (who got the control), more funds in education, less poverty, more intellectuals that can brew more ideas, and a population wise enough to have their OWN opinion on these ideas. So to people would be less manipulated.

I'm in Canada, and right now, there's a big scandal about friends of the Liberal Party of Canada (presently having the power, but they don't have majority in Ottawa, so there will be elections, soon) who took profit from it (a program of 250 millions $CAN), and now the people is shocked. They wouldn't have been if they had checked for abnormalities in the first place. That's why democracy doesn't work, we don't care. We elect them for 4 years, then it's their job.

The population has got to be wiser, smarter and more interested in politics, if we want a democracy to be useful. And for your two arguments, I absolutely agree with you!

Absolute democracy is bad, mainly because people can be fickle, uninformed and bigoted. The Franklin quote in my signature is all you need. :)

Actually the machines in the Matrix weren't evil or powerhungry... they just wanted to exist, and we (as humans) wanted to destroy them....

and the first matrix was a utopia, but nobody bought it. So as long as we dont blow it we can like happily ever after and maybee even get the robots to turn off death so we can run arround and shoot eachother and not get hurt. that would be sweet.

What did you choose at the "Democracy Going to the Dogs"-Issue? ;)
I never got it. At least I don't remember getting it.