NationStates Jolt Archive

What are your opinions of democracy? I also pose a question, do find democracy to be efficient politically?
I would also like to think those who posted on 'My Love Letter' thread.

Look at the Galactic Senate (in Star Wars) of an example of how Democracy can fail...it becomes too overly burdened with bureacracy and debate without decisive action...kind of like the Real Life United Nations...

Is Democracy a good thing? Yes
Is it tyranny by majority? No
Does Democracy always work? No

I think it was Winston Churchill who said "Democracy is the worst form of Government. Apart from all the others."

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, in which the 51% may take away the rights of the other 49%"
-Thomas Jefferson

It CAN be tyranny by majority, if there is no way for the minority to fight back.

Perhaps I am bitter because the US is soaked in bureaucracy. Pay no attention to my ramblings.

Many countries soaked in democracy there are

Look at the Galactic Senate (in Star Wars) of an example of how Democracy can fail...it becomes too overly burdened with bureacracy and debate without decisive action...kind of like the Real Life United Nations...

With the star wars ananlogy i'd be willing to argue that democracy fell mainly becuase of the Republics fears over the seperatists, giving more and more power to one man in the hope of stopping the seperatists, kind of like the U.S and the U.K and its war on terror.

What are your opinions of democracy? I also pose a question, do find democracy to be efficient politically?
I would also like to think those who posted on 'My Love Letter' thread.
Pure democracy is horrible, and would constitute a tyranny of the majority.

Let's take a vote on whether to ban democracy.

Gotta agree with Churchill on the view of Democracy, or indeed any system of government. They all have their advantages and drawbacks.

For me, Democracy would be favourable only if the rights of the minority were protected, otherwise it is simply tyranny by majority, as someone stated.

Look at the Galactic Senate (in Star Wars) of an example of how Democracy can fail...it becomes too overly burdened with bureacracy and debate without decisive action...kind of like the Real Life United Nations...

Is Democracy a good thing? Yes
Is it tyranny by majority? No
Does Democracy always work? No

Why do people keep posting an example from star wars as if its applicable to real life? I hate to state the obvious but: its just a movie.

Pure democracy is horrible, and would constitute a tyranny of the majority.

Same thing with pure Republic.

I'm sick and tired that people refuse to understand that what protects minorities in the US isn't the fact that we are Republic, but that we are a Constitutional Republic.

A Constitutional Democracy would provide just as much protection for minorities.

But of course, the politicians don't want you knowing that, god forbid they lose their jobs and the near totalitarian oliogarchy we live in today disappears.

"My dear, it's only a movie"
---Alfred Hitchcock

So, yeah, I think democracy sucks, for the simple reason that most voters (at least in the U.S.) are flaming idiots. Polls show that a majority of them want to lower taxes, balance the budget, and increase funding to programs such as Medicaid and welfare....all at the same time. One pollster (I think it was for a college in the Midwest, but I don't really know) called people to ask what they thought of the Monetary Control Act. 46% of them had an opinion about the bill. The other 54% didn't know what it was. What I'm distressed about is the 46% who claimed to know what it was. The Monetary Control Act doesn't exist, so wtf?

Democracy is good, but IMO you have to balance it correctly, at least in representative democracy. Too few representatives = tyranny by majority, but too many if not handled correctly can choke the process. I'm not a fan of particracy (rule by parties, not the online political game)

I'd say about at least a billion of the world's population is saying right now:

"What good is democracy when I am living in extreme poverty?"
mmmmmmmmmmm cheese
Just think about that one for a bit

I think the best form of government is a dictatorship with me in charge. Anything else is second-rate; but of all the options I've seen Democracy is probably the best, despite it's shortcomings. I definately have my problems with it, but whaddyagonnado.

Democracy sucks. Up with fascism!

No, to be serious, democracy seems to be the most smoothly working governmental solution we've found so far. It has its kinks, but it seems to work a bit better than the other options.

An applicable quote:
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
-Winston Churchill

EDIT:
Let me specify something:
Not pure democracy. Pure democracy = bad.

EDIT 2:
Argh, somebody posted a paraphrased version of the quote I used before I did, and I didn't notice it. Sorry about the duplicate quote.

democracy CAN be tyrany, but tyranny doens't have to be bad. I mean, if the tyrant watches out for everyone, and there are equal rights and everything, it is fine and dandy, and people say, Hail the Tyrant ::grins::

democracy CAN be tyrany, but tyranny doens't have to be bad. I mean, if the tyrant watches out for everyone, and there are equal rights and everything, it is fine and dandy, and people say, Hail the Tyrant ::grins::
Sadly the days of Classical Greece are history.

Personally I think we should either

a) create a test of political awareness that everyone who wishes to vote must pass. Or

b) select our leaders by lot from each region but make sure they can pass a similar test to the one above.

Both would increase the chances of a decent government getting in rather than the potential for one getting in by appealing to the quietly racist majority (a dodged bullet in the UK).

That's absurd.

A system like that would be above corruption....how? You think we wouldn't still wind up with joke politicians like Bush in charge?

I think it was Winston Churchill who said "Democracy is the worst form of Government. Apart from all the others."
And Socrates, well Socrates said that it was the second worst, teh real worst is actual tyranny. but since democracy is tyranny by majority it is actually equal with one man tyranny.

I never said 'above corruption' it would though reduce the chances of a nut getting into power.

A good quote, inspired by Douglas Adams

Those who want the power are generally those most manifestly unsuited to wielding it.

With the star wars ananlogy i'd be willing to argue that democracy fell mainly becuase of the Republics fears over the seperatists, giving more and more power to one man in the hope of stopping the seperatists, kind of like the U.S and the U.K and its war on terror.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I like the comparison with the U S AND UK
although i would personally not vote for Kerry. I would probably end up voting for some zoist-like politician..but that's just a minority, another reason I hate pure democracy or beaurocrat corrupted republic..

Maybe I can become the next US dictator, too bad Bush already took that job... :(
:D :p

That's absurd.

A system like that would be above corruption....how? You think we wouldn't still wind up with joke politicians like Bush in charge?
Both Kerry and Bush are nut politicians!!
AS the Jedi say:"Politicians are corrupt"

People need rights to be protected from tyranny from one individual. But I have a strong dislike of democracy because after wars where strong sound leaders are deposed the country is left with a bunch of people who don't know anything trying to fix their country.
Being an Austrian/Hungarian, German, and Russian monarchist I see these countries in dire need of sovereigns, not of parliament.
The Slavic people are in horrible states without the Austrian empire and the stability that the Kaisers brought. With the reformations being instituted by Karl I at the end of World War I that region would be much better today.
And look at poor Germany and Russia without their monarchs.
Starving countries with little nationalism.
Democracy can help, but it can't work without someone running it.

That's my stance. Action over majority.

Personally I think we should either

a) create a test of political awareness that everyone who wishes to vote must pass. Or


Not such a good idea. Who would create the test and decide what would be on it?

People need rights to be protected from tyranny from one individual. But I have a strong dislike of democracy because after wars where strong sound leaders are deposed the country is left with a bunch of people who don't know anything trying to fix their country.
Being an Austrian/Hungarian, German, and Russian monarchist I see these countries in dire need of sovereigns, not of parliament.
The Slavic people are in horrible states without the Austrian empire and the stability that the Kaisers brought. With the reformations being instituted by Karl I at the end of World War I that region would be much better today.
And look at poor Germany and Russia without their monarchs.
Starving countries with little nationalism.
Democracy can help, but it can't work without someone running it.

That's my stance. Action over majority.
This individual would soon become corrupt and lose te best interests of the people in exchange for his own.

Yes but most people here agree the democracy is also corrupt. People need ratified rights protecting them. But they can't govern themselves long.

Same thing with pure Republic.

I'm sick and tired that people refuse to understand that what protects minorities in the US isn't the fact that we are Republic, but that we are a Constitutional Republic.

A Constitutional Democracy would provide just as much protection for minorities.

But of course, the politicians don't want you knowing that, god forbid they lose their jobs and the near totalitarian oliogarchy we live in today disappears.


Since no one seems to catch it.

Odd thing is, the U.S is championing Democracy when itself is not truly democratic, by it's own definition.

Allow me to explain:
Bush invades other countries to spread his own beliefs (democacy), yet he condemns other countries for doing similar.
From what I've been hearing, U.S civil liberties are falling. I may be wrong, but I don't think so.
Camp X-Ray treats prisoners just as bad as any dictator. At least Mr. Dictator doesn't try to hide it.

Democracy is more than voting for your leaders. It's about freedom of speech. It's about freedom from censorship. It's about the freedom to live your life.

Mob rule by majority. No. If the U.S became a theocracy tommorow, the that would be mob rule by majority.

Personally, I prefer the idea of individual city states. Is that a Repuplic?

Personally, I prefer the idea of individual city states. Is that a Repuplic?
Explain further, I like this conversation.

Personally, I prefer the idea of individual city states. Is that a Repuplic?

It's called a confederacy and, paired with a direct democracy, is my prefered form of utopian government.

Unless you mean actual individual, unrelated city-states, in which case it's usually refered to by that name: city-states.

It's called a confederacy and, paired with a direct democracy, is my prefered form of utopian government.

Unless you mean actual individual, unrelated city-states, in which case it's usually refered to by that name: city-states.
It sounds like a good idea, in theory (but of course nearly everything does), how would this work?

Democracy

Expect for all other forms of Government its the worst

It sounds like a good idea, in theory (but of course nearly everything does), how would this work?

A confederacy?

Basically, it'd be a bunch of nominally independent states, usually around the size of a congressional district nowadays, led by a very weak federal government that only controlled such things as international relations, national currency, and basic rights guarantees.

A city states system?

Well, er, Classical Greece.

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, in which the 51% may take away the rights of the other 49%"
-Thomas Jefferson
To quote Spock, don't snigger now, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

A confederacy?

Basically, it'd be a bunch of nominally independent states, usually around the size of a congressional district nowadays, led by a very weak federal government that only controlled such things as international relations, national currency, and basic rights guarantees.

A city states system?

Well, er, Classical Greece.
Wouldn't that cause inter-city warfare if it was like Greece?
And the confederacy sounds extremely federalist, I'm not saying thats a negative.