Democracy: Does the system work?

[Legendary]

Area 51 is a military base where the latest in weapons technology is assembled and tested. Former workers (from 1970's) have come out and said as much, and as military records are eventually released once the information is no longer sensitive, this is actually easily verified by our free press, which they have done on occasions. It IS possible that this has changed since the 70's/80's, but it's just as likely that nothing has really changed, and they don't let people in because they might be spies/saboteurs.

Can you give another example?

 

[angus]

I take the word "Utopia" to mean a state of utter and changeless perfection, which is a view widely subscribed to by people all over the internet. The idea of Utopia is one repulsive to me, because for humans to live in true happiness, society must be dynamic and ever-changing, yet stable and well-balanced between recreation time and work. The very idea of a Utopian society is the very epitome of boringness.

Democracy is heading in the right direction, to a dynamic, but well balanced and prosperous society. The hard question is, if not Democracy, then what system should we use?

Communism is flawed because humans always want better for themselves, so the government has to step in and control them, which violates the very foundation of Communism: That no man is greater or lesser than another. The government asserts power over the people, and so shatters the fundimental principle governing Communism.

The main problem with Monarchy or Dictatorship societies is that the people have little say about which laws are passed or not passed. The ruling is done by whoever's ancesters were better murderers than the rest. An evil monarch or dictator has absolute control and can put into effect laws which can destroy entire countries. Adolf Hitler is a case in point.

Anarchy is a horrible system, which reduces citizens to little more than beasts engaged in a perpetual power struggle, striving to be the one on top. Anarchy is described in a typical animal pack. There is an Alpha member, who is forever staving off attacks and advances by others, and the rest, who are all trying to be the Alpha member.

When the alternatives are considered, Democracy is obviously the best choice.

 

[Stardust]

Another example is the many UFO sightings that have taken place.  They cover them all up when they can, and if there is material evidence they don't let anyone in the area until they remove it, covered.  They're obviously hiding something to be so vigilant in making sure no one sees them.

Also, I think a Group Monarchy (not sure what else to call it) would be a good alternative.  This is where a group of people rule over everything instead of just one and it creates a more balanced system.  Each person would be a representative of their region and carry with them the viewpoints that are specific to that area, creating fair representation.  Of course, for this to work without corruption, a system for partial democracy must be put in place.  This will activate mostly when the people feel a person or the entire group needs to be gone, in which case new representatives will be chosen if a majority of the people agree.

~Guardian1239

 

[___]

The "group monarchy" you've described, supposing for a moment that your "monarchs" are elected, is called representative government and it's pretty much how democratic governments already work :/

As for the government hiding things from people, you don't have to get as extravagant as Area 51 and UFO sightings and this X-Files stuff to have something to complain about.  Operations carried out by the CIA all over the world (including on our own soil) for the past 50 years are a good place to start; even the stuff old enough to be declassified and open to public inspection by way of the Freedom of Information Act is pretty terrifying (the fact that we have the FoIA is something to be proud of, if only what we found out through it were put up to some kind of accountability).  From sponsoring guerrillas and terrorists to assassination attempts and supporting brutal regimes in the pursuit of U.S. "interests", to experimentation with chemical and biological agents on our own citizens it's pretty frightening what even a relatively young government agency will do with no accountability and the ability to operate in secret.  I don't want my country's name backing up this kind of shit for any reason, personally.

 

[Stardust]

Yes, I suppose it is a republic, which is a form of democracy.  It's a little bit less restricting then, let's say, the U.S. government, because there is only one branch of government.  And yes, our government does many things which wouldn't make us proud.  What's worse is when something goes wrong, no one takes the blame.  After they found out Iraq didn't have any weapons of mass destruction, the entire government was just like "uh . . . uh . . . uh . . .", and President Bush was saying "We must remain vigilant and finish up!", but we really didn't have any reason to be there unless he's trying to make Iraq a democracy.

~Guardian1239

 

[Legendary]

How about the fact that the country would fall apart completely? It's not just that the democracy would collapse, but that the STABILITY would collapse, and a lot of civilians would be terrorized/killed, not to mention a problem of refugees fleeing into areas safer for them (depending on which branch of Islam gets the upper hand). Democracy, the icing on the cake, yes. But now, pulling out is gonna kill more people than would die if we stayed.

 

[Stardust]

I hate to sound like I don't care - I really do.  But, we need to fix our country first.  We're beginning to have economical problem with rising fuel prices, and because of that, higher prices on everything.  This war is costing the U.S. billions of dollars each year when we're already in the largest deficit in U.S. history.  It's not our job to take care of other countries.  We're not the only superpower in the world, which seems to be a view shared by most Americans.  If they want democracy, they should fight for it like we had to.  We didn't even really give them an option.  We just forced democracy on them.  Admittedly, it's better than their previous leader, but I don't think they're ready to become a democracy yet.  When we pull out, whether it's this year or eight years from now, the result is going to be the same, I fear.

~Guardian1239

 

[skirtboy]

Yes, I suppose it is a republic, which is a form of democracy.  It's a little bit less restricting then, let's say, the U.S. government, because there is only one branch of government. 

A government with no branches will quickly become a tyrannical regime, as there is nothing to check it's power.

 

[Stardust]

Yes, I suppose it is a republic, which is a form of democracy.  It's a little bit less restricting then, let's say, the U.S. government, because there is only one branch of government. 

A government with no branches will quickly become a tyrannical regime, as there is nothing to check it's power.

There is the fact that the people would be able to remove any member by a majority vote.  This would be a law that could not be changed or removed.  Three branches takes far too long, in my opinion, and nothing major ever gets done in time.

~Guardian1239

 

[skirtboy]

How would you ensure that the government could not change this rule? For that matter, how are you going to prevent the government from banning advertisments calling for removal, thus bypassing the law?

 

[Stardust]

A good question.  Admittedly, I can't think of much besides immediate removal of those who proposed the changes or bans on advertisements.

~Guardian1239

 

[sayonara-p]

First of all, sorry about my english. Feel free to correct me, since I want to learn

Said that, let's get to the point.

Democracy, in theory, would work better that in fact it does. The problem I see is that most of actual democracies are representative, instead of participative. A representative democracy is in my opinion quite ineffective, since people vote a whole "manifesto", and maybe (for example) I can vote a politician because I agree most of his manifesto instead of the whole manifesto. But... a participative democracy requires more organization, more implication from people and, what is most important, a lot of implication from politicians. And... wow!! wait!! A politician working? unthinkable!!  :lol:

When someone sais "the problem in actual politic terms is that generally people don't like politic issues". I don't think the same... I think "In fact, politicians really don't like people".

That's my humble opinion.


regards

 

[Stardust]

The electoral college, which essentially votes for us, was created because, at the time, the average person wasn't smart enough to make an educated decision.  An absolute democracy, which I believe is what you're referring to, where each person votes on an issue directly, isn't practical.  It worked in Athens because they had little else to do, but how would people be able to vote on laws, knowing what they entitle and such, in the current time?  I do think the electoral college should be removed.  It takes away any real power we have in deciding our representatives.

~Guardian1239

 

[skirtboy]

Whilst a direct democracy may indeed be impractical, syanara has a good point on the machinations of party politics. In a two party system, whenever one party takes a point of view on an issue, the other party will take the extreme opposite view. This means, for example, that voting for a party will always mean supporting issues you disapprove of.

 

[Stardust]

The main problem with that is the fact that we only have two main parties.  What we need is more parties, but the problem is that they usually don't have the money to make themselves known like the other two.

~Guardian1239

 

[___]

Guardian, I don't think you really have a good grasp of the government structure in the U.S. based on what I've read from you so far.  This isn't the place for me or anyone else to go into it in depth for you but I really strongly suggest you do a little bit of reading on it, you have to get your facts and concepts straight to discuss at the level you want to : /  It's worth doing anyway, anyone living in a free country should have an understanding of how it functions.

 

[Stardust]

Admittedly, I should have done more research before replying.  I have a pretty good idea of how the branch system works, such as how laws, amendments, treaties, etc. are created.  If I'm downright wrong on something important, please correct me, either here or via PM.  I'm more of a story creator, so I usually hold on to ideas and concepts that I think I'll need better than deeper ones.  I'm willing to research and come back, but I'll need to know what specific areas I'm lacking in.

~Guardian1239