What replaces democracy?

[DesEsseintes]

'The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.'

The GB, as ever a microcosm of the real world (God help us all), has been full of people decrying democracy recently and appealing for a return to some form of benevolent dictatorship. Certainly the masses, ill-educated lumpenproletariat that they are, cannot be trusted to know anything about the policies or ideology of the parties they scrawl their illiterate crosses next to. As a result, democracy is rendered more and more meaningless. At one, absurd, level, we have the rise of the stupid parties, such as the Tea Party in the US and UKIP in the UK, devoted not to reasoned debate but serving as a depository for blind, inchoate rage, and at another. More sinister is the increasing power of corporations and multinational bodies, serving not the people but the shareholders, and increasingly setting themselves quite clearly against democracy.

So what is the solution? Are there ways of bringing back democracy? Electronic/compulsory voting - participative democracy, such as in ancient Athens? Or do we move towards some kind of anarcho-syndicalist break down of larger communities? Communism/socialism? Militia?

Can democracy be saved? Is it even worth saving? And what might come in its place.

Have at you. Or don't. See if I care.

 

[rosco rathbone]

i always thought of myself as a universal suffrage, chartist, democrat, and the recent drama made me see the other side. "the country should be ruled by those who built it" or words to that effect --John Jay

 

[Mr_Jon_Thon]

Plato answered this once upon a time.

 

[Que]

It is not either or.

Our founding documents (in America of course) provide that democracy happens at the local level and with your feet.

Just as you do not cede your sovereignty to the whims and popular vote of Grecians, Spaniards, French and Portuguese when you joined the European Union, neither did Rhode Island or Tejas.

If local control as is supposed to be the case was in effect, those that happen to be on the losing side of some issue that can be resolved no other way than majority rule can sulk a little less, because it is their own friends and neighbors that effected that change. The analog to our example is the poets deciding for the GB what the zoning laws would look like, for a town they never visit.

The reason we were founded as a nation ruled by laws rather than a nation ruled by men is that the men will vary in their degree of benevolence, but the law is constant. Well it was until the executive and judicial branches both decided they can change it on a whim, wither by decree of the temporary 4 year king or by the decree of very old men appointed for life and answerable to no one.

Some things do require democracy, but those ought to be few and far between. My State and California are known for referendum voting. We just changed out State Constitution to give out legislature the Authority to tell the Feds to "bugger off" anytime they want to come into our State and enforce a federal law. They have to bring their own tanks. Not sure that sweeping changes from barely understood ballot initiatives passed with a minimum majority is a great idea. I voted yes, by the by.

Getting back to option two. I accept that some local issues have to be put to a vote, or at least enacted by local leaders, easily recalled by local vote. There is no "they did this to us" if decisions are local.

If my locale gets to "this way" or "that way" for my taste, I can enact meaningful change by politicking my friends and neighbors, organizing and raising hell at counsel meetings. Imagine you are a beleaguered City Counsel member. Are you really going to do something stupid knowing it will result in a a 20 minute speech from the floor by Query/ Didn't think so. Do I actually do any of that? No. Too many decisions I disagree with are out of the hands of local officials. Working on the national stage as an individual is pissing into the ocean.

If all of the above fail, I can vote with my feet, load up my wagon, yoke the oxen and head to another location, as my ancestors did. Plenty of freedom left in America if you know where to look.

We are supposed to be a representative republic. We have grown far to large for any individual to say he has a meaningful voice. No matter where you live 1/2 of the people are unrepresented. Each rep is responsible for almost 1 million voices.

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

I thought it all changed to $1 -> one vote bro?

Stew

 

[Que]

I thought it all changed to $1 -> one vote bro?

Stew

No, even in the most impoverished areas of Mississippi a vote cost $15 last cycle, bro.

I'm up to paying $20/vote for "walkin' around money" in the political board poll.

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

No, even in the most impoverished areas of Mississippi a vote cost $15 last cycle, bro.

I'm up to paying $20/vote for "walkin' around money" in the political board poll.

maybe OPEC and Russia will flood the market with votes and the price will bottom out bro!

Stew

 

[Que]

maybe OPEC and Russia will flood the market with votes and the price will bottom out bro!

Stew

That is a stellar, idea, bro. I'll ask Santa to bring me a vote-cartel for Christmas.

I keep waiting to be able to say, "Well that is certainly a Stew Pidd sort of idea, bro" but I haven't seen one yet.

 

[PoppingTom]

We are supposed to be a representative republic. We have grown far to large for any individual to say he has a meaningful voice. No matter where you live 1/2 of the people are unrepresented. Each rep is responsible for almost 1 million voices.

I think I'll never get how Americans can say "We're not living in a democracy, we're living in a republic", a sentence any dictatorship in the world can claim for itself.

I was born and raised in a dictatorship.

You can elect your president. We couldn't.
You can impeach him. We could only do a revolution.
You can vote for congress, who can have a serious impact on the president. We couldn't even vote for other parties, only for representatives who got no influence at all.
You can do a million men march to Washington and make the birthday of an important person a national holiday. We hadn't even the chance to speak in public about a person the government don't like.

Especially Americans can vote for more than we can do now. You can vote for your attorney general? We can't. And I'm living in a democracy now.

I think too much people confuse "democracy" with "everybody is the king". Truth is: if you think you can do it better and enough people believe you, you can become the king. You take that for granted in every form of rule, but it's only essential in a democracy.

 

[Que]

I think I'll never get how Americans can say "We're not living in a democracy, we're living in a republic", a sentence any dictatorship in the world can claim for itself.

I was born and raised in a dictatorship.

You can elect your president. We couldn't.
You can impeach him. We could only do a revolution.
You can vote for congress, who can have a serious impact on the president. We couldn't even vote for other parties, only for representatives who got no influence at all.
You can do a million men march to Washington and make the birthday of an important person a national holiday. We hadn't even the chance to speak in public about a person the government don't like.

Especially Americans can vote for more than we can do now. You can vote for your attorney general? We can't. And I'm living in a democracy now.

I think too much people confuse "democracy" with "everybody is the king". Truth is: if you think you can do it better and enough people believe you, you can become the king. You take that for granted in every form of rule, but it's only essential in a democracy.

We do not elect whoever is the most persuasive to be king.

We have no king.

We have the law as king.

We only democratically elect representatives to update and modify that body of law within specific, controlled guidelines that are governed by our founding documents that were designed expressly to make change by any one man very difficult.

We are not a democracy. We are not supposed to put it to majority vote to tax the few smokers. That violates the equal protection under the law concept.

We are living as an out of control democracy where 51% of the people get to decide what the definition of the rights outlined in our constitution mean.

 

[NYC_Man]

USA took after Rome

 

[Que]

USA took after Rome

Greece was closer to the model in mind.

 

[Kitty]

I say...

ANARCHY!

Pure anarchy. No one gives a shit about the laws and politicians anyhow. What exactly is so bad about Communism...?

 

[Kitty]

USA took after Rome

No, it was more Greece. Rome looked to Greece anyway. Democracy was established first in Athens.

 

[DesEsseintes]

I say...

ANARCHY!

Pure anarchy. No one gives a shit about the laws and politicians anyhow. What exactly is so bad about Communism...?

I'm with you there, Kitty. You should read The Dispossessed, by Ursula K Le Guin, about an anarchist community on the just about inhabitable moon of a liberal-capitalist planet. They aren't saints at all, just humans bumbling along and trying to be decent, like most of us are.

 

[NYC_Man]

I say...

ANARCHY!

Pure anarchy. No one gives a shit about the laws and politicians anyhow. What exactly is so bad about Communism...?

Communism would be best if you take out the human factor

Greece was closer to the model in mind.

Maybe it was closer in mind but they made USA a republic

 

[Libsam]

It's a cycle.

Democracy > Socialism > Communism > Dictatorship > Revolution- the etymology of revolution is to revolve.

Whats that quote that says something like "democracy never lasts because the people will learn that they can vote themselves free stuff."

 

[Libsam]

Also, look up Minarchism. Out of all the definitions of Anarchy it's my favorite, so far.

 

[PoppingTom]

We do not elect whoever is the most persuasive to be king.

We have no king.

We have the law as king.

....

We are not a democracy. We are not supposed to put it to majority vote to tax the few smokers. That violates the equal protection under the law concept.

American Bullshit you pray everyday before going to bed. Still not true. You can even vote to become a dictatorship, like we did in 1933.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

What replaces democracy?

A Republic.

 

[Laurel]

I think I'll never get how Americans can say "We're not living in a democracy, we're living in a republic", a sentence any dictatorship in the world can claim for itself.

I was born and raised in a dictatorship.

You can elect your president. We couldn't.
You can impeach him. We could only do a revolution.
You can vote for congress, who can have a serious impact on the president. We couldn't even vote for other parties, only for representatives who got no influence at all.
You can do a million men march to Washington and make the birthday of an important person a national holiday. We hadn't even the chance to speak in public about a person the government don't like.

Especially Americans can vote for more than we can do now. You can vote for your attorney general? We can't. And I'm living in a democracy now.

I think too much people confuse "democracy" with "everybody is the king". Truth is: if you think you can do it better and enough people believe you, you can become the king. You take that for granted in every form of rule, but it's only essential in a democracy.

Interesting and valuable perspective.

 

[Que]

American Bullshit you pray everyday before going to bed. Still not true. You can even vote to become a dictatorship, like we did in 1933.

No, legally we cannot vote to give the president unlimited power. It requires a constitutional amendment which requires concurrence of the states which no dictator is going to get.

Someone might attempt to illegally seize power but that can happen anywhere. This last election here was not about dictatorship, but it was about over-reach the president has been hobbled even further by the voters.

The prospect of getting the voters in 3/4 of the states to ratify any such power grab is nill. I dare say our documents are stronger than yours were in 1933. A military coup is an option. Electing a dictator, not.

 

[NaughtyinVegas]

I think I'll never get how Americans can say "We're not living in a democracy, we're living in a republic", a sentence any dictatorship in the world can claim for itself.

I was born and raised in a dictatorship.

You can elect your president. We couldn't.
You can impeach him. We could only do a revolution.
You can vote for congress, who can have a serious impact on the president. We couldn't even vote for other parties, only for representatives who got no influence at all.
You can do a million men march to Washington and make the birthday of an important person a national holiday. We hadn't even the chance to speak in public about a person the government don't like.

Especially Americans can vote for more than we can do now. You can vote for your attorney general? We can't. And I'm living in a democracy now.

I think too much people confuse "democracy" with "everybody is the king". Truth is: if you think you can do it better and enough people believe you, you can become the king. You take that for granted in every form of rule, but it's only essential in a democracy.

It's not a democracy if the majority of people either don't vote, or are dissuaded from voting by misinformation, or their votes don't count because the electoral college votes go entirely to one candidate and aren't allocated by percentage of the vote.

I think you're looking at the malaise too much from your own personal myopic view and not from the broader intent of the U.S. Constitution.

Also, I think you are the one confusing "democracy" with the notion that "everybody is the king". A true democracy means freedom of choices, yes, but not that one person or minority group of persons can dictate the law of the land.

And that is the situation we have in this country right now.

George W. Bush did not get the most votes for President and yet he was the President of the United States for 8 years.

The majority of Americans support gay marriage and yet gay marriage is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support a woman's right to choose and yet abortion is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support legalized marijuana and yet marijuana is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support a reduced military presence in foreign countries around the world and yet military spending in this country (counting veteran benefits that fall under "social programs) is over 50% of our GDP.

Whether or not you grew up in a true dictatorship may or may not be debatable since you chose to withhold where you're from.

But what is not debatable is the fact that we are NOT living in a true democracy.

(Note: I am NOT a Democrat or a Republican. I just look at the facts. Which, I invite you to do as well before you make an assumptions about Americans that were born and raised in this country.)

 

[Que]

It's not a democracy if the majority of people either don't vote, or are dissuaded from voting by misinformation, or their votes don't count because the electoral college votes go entirely to one candidate and aren't allocated by percentage of the vote.

I think you're looking at the malaise too much from your own personal myopic view and not from the broader intent of the U.S. Constitution.

Also, I think you are the one confusing "democracy" with the notion that "everybody is the king". A true democracy means freedom of choices, yes, but not that one person or minority group of persons can dictate the law of the land.

And that is the situation we have in this country right now.

George W. Bush did not get the most votes for President and yet he was the President of the United States for 8 years.

The majority of Americans support gay marriage and yet gay marriage is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support a woman's right to choose and yet abortion is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support legalized marijuana and yet marijuana is illegal in most states.

The majority of Americans support a reduced military presence in foreign countries around the world and yet military spending in this country (counting veteran benefits that fall under "social programs) is over 50% of our GDP.

Whether or not you grew up in a true dictatorship may or may not be debatable since you chose to withhold where you're from.

But what is not debatable is the fact that we are NOT living in a true democracy.

(Note: I am NOT a Democrat or a Republican. I just look at the facts. Which, I invite you to do as well before you make an assumptions about Americans that were born and raised in this country.)

Often, I find I get looking at the little details in a post that I want to argue about. I think for a self professed, nonpartisan that also (I assume) doesn't follow politics the way a political junkie would- this is pretty well reasoned out.

There was the suggestion that the politics board would draw other people that tend not to get involved here or in life with politics. I was skeptical. Something that I am glad to be wrong about. Welcome.

 

[DesEsseintes]

Often, I find I get looking at the little details in a post that I want to argue about. I think for a self professed, nonpartisan that also (I assume) doesn't follow politics the way a political junkie would- this is pretty well reasoned out.

There was the suggestion that the politics board would draw other people that tend not to get involved here or in life with politics. I was skeptical. Something that I am glad to be wrong about. Welcome.

Build it and they will come. To be fair, it's also a beautifully crafted, open-ended thread...