manored
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Jun, 2010 01:57 pm
@ImMachiavellian,
I'mMachiavellian;173799 wrote:


:a-thought:That democracy is flawed in the sense that "too" much political freedom is given to the people. The people are "overloaded" with too much political responsibility and this brings instability to debates on decisive action. In conclusion, people just don't know what do with their freedom of political expression becuase they have too much of it.

Well, at least this is my interpretation. What do you guys think?
I Agree with this. Governing a country is complicated like building an skyscraper. If the enginner gets to make the project by itself, all is well, but if a thousand people who dont know much about enginnering get a say in the matter, things get troublesome. Problem is that if nobody checks on the enginner's project he may make it as he wants rather than as it was asked from him.

So it seens to me a balance is necessary, as if the governors get too little power they cant govern, and if they get too much they get corrupt. I think that only allowing people with a decent understanding of government and the current situation of the country to vote may be a way of approaching this balance.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Jun, 2010 05:19 pm
@manored,
manored;173868 wrote:
I Agree with this. Governing a country is complicated like building an skyscraper. If the enginner gets to make the project by itself, all is well, but if a thousand people who dont know much about enginnering get a say in the matter, things get troublesome. Problem is that if nobody checks on the enginner's project he may make it as he wants rather than as it was asked from him.

So it seens to me a balance is necessary, as if the governors get too little power they cant govern, and if they get too much they get corrupt. I think that only allowing people with a decent understanding of government and the current situation of the country to vote may be a way of approaching this balance.


I do see your points of views and I do think that you are correct but only to a degree.
The only problem that I see is that people who rule will loose their sense of ethics over time and will forget about the intellectual challenged people that supply the labor force.:detective:
Krumple
 
  2  
Reply Sun 6 Jun, 2010 05:35 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic;173956 wrote:
I do see your points of views and I do think that you are correct but only to a degree.
The only problem that I see is that people who rule will loose their sense of ethics over time and will forget about the intellectual challenged people that supply the labor force.:detective:


I agree with this. I bet a huge majority of politicians entered into politics with good intentions however once they arrived there was something unexpected waiting for them there. Other politician's influence and perhaps even political threats. The system becomes a crazy game, I see it happen quite often that a politician will vote for something then later either claim that they were not involved or that they voted on it for some other reason but then recant that they were in support of some legislation. It's the whole, "I'm involved when it works for me, but if it works against me, it was because of something unrelated."

These days despite the fact that we record and save everything almost no one holds politicians to their word. They freely say one thing, turn around and contradict themselves and then proclaim they never said it. As if we have no way to verify that they actually did. I see this happen a lot and the only rational explanation I can come up with is that, behind the scenes someone influenced them to change their political stance so then you see the contradiction come out and they defend their new position.

Chameleon Politics.

Barack Obama has made a lot of campaign promises and has broken just about every single one of them, yet almost no one holds him to what he said during his campaign and his current political decisions.
manored
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2010 11:19 pm
@Krumple,
reasoning logic wrote:

I do see your points of views and I do think that you are correct but only to a degree.
The only problem that I see is that people who rule will loose their sense of ethics over time and will forget about the intellectual challenged people that supply the labor force.:detective:
Indeed, that probally will happen, although even if you dont care for the lower classes it is still wise to keep then content anyway, after all, they are in bigger numbers =)

Its kinda funny how many nobilities didnt realize that in the past. Like in the french revolution. If I remember well, the people were starving and there was the king holding parties where he wasted tons of food, instead of keeping a low profile and hoping the masses would blame the bad harvests rather than him.

Krumple wrote:

These days despite the fact that we record and save everything almost no one holds politicians to their word. They freely say one thing, turn around and contradict themselves and then proclaim they never said it. As if we have no way to verify that they actually did. I see this happen a lot and the only rational explanation I can come up with is that, behind the scenes someone influenced them to change their political stance so then you see the contradiction come out and they defend their new position.
I think there is another rational explanation, which is that politicians are merely defending the views that they believe to be the more popular so they gain the favor of the people, and if perchance they find they are on the losing side of the dispute, they quickly change sides as to remain popular... reminds me of sunflowers, changing direction constantly to always catch the solar rays of popularity =)

I am certain there are politicians who only care about getting the power so they can get rich in one of the myriad of ways that are avaible for the powerful.

Krumple wrote:

Chameleon Politics.

Barack Obama has made a lot of campaign promises and has broken just about every single one of them, yet almost no one holds him to what he said during his campaign and his current political decisions.
I think people are so used to politicians breaking their promisses that then a politician does so rather than getting angry at him for breaking his promise, they get angry at themselves for having believed on them.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2010 11:23 pm
@kennethamy,
A republic is any system of government which is based upon the law, and therefore excludes government by fiat, whether by an individual (monarchy) or a privileged class (oligarchy). On that basis, claiming that North Korea is truly a republic would be laughable, as long as one can ignore the tragedy of the lives of the majority of Koreans in that "nation." Essentially, the United Kingdom is a functional republic, regardless of what silly games they play with their monarch.
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2010 11:56 pm
@manored,
Yes, democracy in itself has immense flaws, but unfortunaly any other form of goverment are even more flawed.

One must consider the period of time a ruler can have power, the successor part, the dividing of power, the limits of power ..etc.

Imo only when we become supersavants through genetics, we can invent better form of goverments.
Minimal
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 12:13 am
@manored,
Where is this "equal say" business?
;-)
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 01:08 am
@Minimal,
Minimal wrote:
Where is this "equal say" business?
Seems you read the initial post without comprehending anything.

The initial post does speak of "equal say" and that's excatly the core problem we are discussing, and it is the core problem of democracy.
Minimal
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 01:42 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

Minimal wrote:
Where is this "equal say" business?
Seems you read the initial post without comprehending anything.

The initial post does speak of "equal say" and that's excatly the core problem we are discussing, and it is the core problem of democracy.


And I was agreeing. You seem to be taking this very personally...

Regards,

Minimal.
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 01:46 am
@Minimal,
I'm sorry if it's how you see it.
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 02:02 am
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:
Barack Obama has made a lot of campaign promises and has broken just about every single one of them, yet almost no one holds him to what he said during his campaign and his current political decisions.
His current situation doesn't allow him much elbow room, thus it would be difficult to demand him make good on any promises he made.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 06:10 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:



Yes, the United States is a democratic republic.


The US is a Constitutional Republic that has been on the wrong path toward some kind of bullshit 'democracy' for far to many years.

The US needs to return to what it was and what it was intended to be.
Aquathunda
 
  2  
Reply Tue 15 Jun, 2010 11:11 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:

I have been think about democracy lately, and I have came to a conclusion: it is flawed. The reason: everyone gets an equal amount of say on who is going to lead the country next, but not everyone has the necessary knowledge about the current state of the country and of the world, to make a wise decision.


Well that is a very obvious flaw. Every system has it's downside. Either idiots call the shots, or the smart become too corrupt and powerful. There is a natural cycle in play, we will realize that democracy is bad because there are too many idiots, and then we will realize that in the next system, there is too much corruption and the majority has no say, so we go back and forth.

Once we educate everyone or cure corruption we can finally have a stable government. We will keep giving and taking until equilibrium occurs, then we will be happy.
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jun, 2010 11:41 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

kennethamy wrote:



Yes, the United States is a democratic republic.


The US is a Constitutional Republic that has been on the wrong path toward some kind of bullshit 'democracy' for far to many years.

Quote:
The US needs to return to what it was and what it was intended to be.


which the US can only do with more than 2 parties

the US needs at least 4 to 5 political parties to be truly a democracy

espectially with your population
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 04:23 pm
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

Yes, democracy in itself has immense flaws, but unfortunaly any other form of goverment are even more flawed.

One must consider the period of time a ruler can have power, the successor part, the dividing of power, the limits of power ..etc.

Imo only when we become supersavants through genetics, we can invent better form of goverments.
Any other forms of government discovered thus far... maybe we can invent better ones! =)

I agree that genetic modification would help a lot, but it will probaly still take a long time until we can modify well enough to supress bad traits, specially with all the opposition against the pratice there will be.

Aquathunda wrote:

Well that is a very obvious flaw. Every system has it's downside. Either idiots call the shots, or the smart become too corrupt and powerful. There is a natural cycle in play, we will realize that democracy is bad because there are too many idiots, and then we will realize that in the next system, there is too much corruption and the majority has no say, so we go back and forth.

Once we educate everyone or cure corruption we can finally have a stable government. We will keep giving and taking until equilibrium occurs, then we will be happy.
I agree. I wonder what is easier to cure... corruption or stupdiness? =)

probaly stupdiness
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 07/23/2019 at 07:53:02