Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most people seem think that just having more voting about everything to make society more democratic just always automatically makes everything better. It's like people have turned democracy into a religion and don't even care about logic and reason anymore.
I get it that we need to have SOME kind of democracy. We need to be able to hold our leaders accountable, but the idea that democracy is this perfect solution to everything is a myth. And yet even saying this is generally enough to be called a anti-democratic fascist by hordes of people.
Probably because though Democracy sux, it's better than all alternatives except a Constitutional Republic.
Did you read what I wrote? I understand that there needs to be some kind of democracy, but we don't need to choose between 100% dictaroship or 100% direct democracy. There is a middle ground. There are so many people that think more voting is always better because it gives people more voice, which they believe should be an end in itself instead of just being a means to an end.
Did you read what I wrote? I understand that there needs to be some kind of democracy, but we don't need to choose between 100% dictaroship or 100% direct democracy. There is a middle ground. There are so many people that think more voting is always better because it gives people more voice, which they believe should be an end in itself instead of just being a means to an end.
Our founding fathers in the States were adament about limiting direct rule by the masses but still giving them a voice, so they founded our republic, which is the hybrid you seem to seek.
Even in California when Schwarzenegger kept bringing referendums for all to vote on, people got tired of it and requested lawmakers do the job they were hired to do.
Did you read what I wrote? I understand that there needs to be some kind of democracy, but we don't need to choose between 100% dictaroship or 100% direct democracy. There is a middle ground. There are so many people that think more voting is always better because it gives people more voice, which they believe should be an end in itself instead of just being a means to an end.
Yes. We don't have a direct Democracy in the USA, we have a Constitutional Republic which has proven far better than direct Democracy. Our Founding Father rightfully didn't trust a direct Democracy.
Republic/ democracy it matters not.
We have politicians that do whatever they please after they are elected, the party and process matters little. Look at Obama who ran on a platform of "change" and carried out or enhanced just about every policy of his predessor. Can anyone tell me the difference between the two parties who as a matter of record both support the welfare state, the warfare state, the regulatory state and on and on...
If government were regulated to odd jobs and miniscule functions, this wouldn't be much of a problem but as it stands it has been given (taken) influence( control) over every aspect of our lives and will use violence as a means to achieve its ends.
Governments are criminal gangs, nothing more.
Did you read what I wrote? I understand that there needs to be some kind of democracy, but we don't need to choose between 100% dictaroship or 100% direct democracy. There is a middle ground. There are so many people that think more voting is always better because it gives people more voice, which they believe should be an end in itself instead of just being a means to an end.
Some folks think more voting has the tendency, or contains the potential, to lean towards a tyranny of the majority. Are you warning of this?
Also, just curious, what is the 'end' of which you speak?
Some folks think more voting has the tendency, or contains the potential, to lean towards a tyranny of the majority. Are you warning of this?
Also, just curious, what is the 'end' of which you speak?
Political systems are just means to an end. They are intended to accomplish specific things. Dicatorships allow for rapid decision making while democracy protects the people from the state. But systems should not be built for their own sake. There is no reason to make something more democratic via increased voting for no reason if it doesn't result in better governing. For example, I remember this one time where there was a vote on where a new road should be paved where I lived. It was dumb since such a decision is better made by somebody who's job is city planning and not with random people.
I also don't like it how lots of people appear to believe that democracy=people are entitled to get what they want.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
