|
| Thread: Democracy - Stairway to Heaven or Highway to Hell? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT» |
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
posted April 19, 2008 02:40 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 18:06, 19 Apr 2008.
|
Democracy - Stairway to Heaven or Highway to Hell?
There’s been some discussion lately about whether democracy is or isn’t the best political system around… So I was thinking of giving my 2 cents on the topic.
Let’s see the pros and cons of democracy.
PROS (in theory):
-It respects the will of the majority of people
-It disables one same leader being in command for his lifetime
-It introduces the senate and various councils that make it harder for the person on top to draw all the strings
-It emphasizes everyone’s liberty and rights
-It supports free market
-Democratic countries are usually more advanced in terms of science, education and life standard
Those are some basic pros that I can think of. Like it’s mentioned, it’s great in theory, but…
CONS (in reality):
-A dumb, uneducated person’s vote is worth as much as an academic’s. That allows the politicians to simply get the dumb (and usually numerous) side of the country on their side and win the elections.
-It somewhat neglects individuality in favour of the mass (though this is the con of every political system from the beginning of time)
-It’s easy to misuse
-Corruption level can be very high
-There are governments and institutions which are quite repressive though under the mask of democracy to cloud the citizens’ reason
-Democratic countries tend to look down on countries with any other political system, and can get quite aggressive unless they are afraid of that other country
-Free market can easily get out of hand and even become part of the ruling class of sorts (capitalism). This creates new problems, with corporations pursuing some goals of theirs, mostly making money, sometimes causing people to suffer (tobacco industry, oil industry, several types of ecologically harmful industry), but they are untouchable since the entire nation’s economy depends on them
-“Selective democracy”. Cases of hipocrisy and even open lying are not uncommon on both the inner and outer level of politics
In my opinion, the conclusion is that democracy is FAR from perfect, it has many problems of its own, from misuses to core ideological details, but then again, it is probably the most acceptable system available at the moment (the alternatives being communism, fascism and other forms of dictatorship). In the future, like someone stated, maybe it will become possible to implement better, healthier systems (or anarchy?), maybe not, maybe democracy is as close to freedom as mankind will ever get.
Let's hear your opinions... I know it's more appealing to spam unrelated threads, but let's try to give the mods a break and start going on-topic in the Otherside a bit, shall we?
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
GenieLord
Honorable
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 02:43 PM |
|
|
I think that the question is not "is Democracy good?" but "is there any better regime than Democracy?"
On other words, my question is, for anyone who believes the Democracy isn't the best, what regime he believes to be the best? You can mention different existing ones, or even to mention your own ideas to a new kind of regime.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 03:31 PM |
|
|
Ten wolves and one sheep do not vote what's for dinner... 
But there is no true democracy today.
Democracy just seems to work better than all other regimes have in the past.
Quote:
CONS (in reality):
-A dumb, uneducated person’s vote is worth as much as an academic’s. That allows the politicians to simply get the dumb (and usually numerous) side of the country on their side and win the elections.
-It somewhat neglects individuality in favour of the mass (though this is the con of every political system from the beginning of time)
-It’s easy to misuse
-Corruption level can be very high
-There are governments and institutions which are quite repressive though under the mask of democracy to cloud the citizens’ reason
-Democratic countries tend to look down on countries with any other political system, and can get quite aggressive unless they are afraid of that other country
-Free market can easily get out of hand and even become part of the ruling class of sorts (capitalism). This creates new problems, with corporations pursuing some goals of theirs, mostly making money, sometimes causing people to suffer (tobacco industry, oil industry, several types of ecologically harmful industry), but they are untouchable since the entire nation’s economy depends on them
-“Selective democracy”. Cases of hipocrisy and even open lying are not uncommon on both the inner and outer level of politics
Taken out all those which are not unique to democracy...
Also remember that free market =/= democracy.
I think that the main problem is corruption but that is hard to avoid..
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 04:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
-It supports free market
Not necessarily.
Quote:
-A dumb, uneducated person’s vote is worth as much as an academic’s. That allows the politicians to simply get the dumb (and usually numerous) side of the country on their side and win the elections.
Maybe we should have to take tests about the candidates' positions before we can vote?
Quote:
-It somewhat neglects individuality in favour of the mass (though this is the con of every political system from the beginning of time)
A good democracy respects individuality. Besides, a democracy is probably the best (known) system as far as individuality goes.
Quote:
-Corruption level can be very high
On the other hand, in a democracy it is easier to get rid of a corrupt politician than in any other system.
Quote:
Free market can easily get out of hand and even become part of the ruling class of sorts (capitalism). This creates new problems, with corporations pursuing some goals of theirs, mostly making money, sometimes causing people to suffer (tobacco industry, oil industry, several types of ecologically harmful industry), but they are untouchable since the entire nation’s economy depends on them.
It's bad when the tobacco, oil, or other environmentally harmful indistries are powerful. On the other hand, the free market can be and often is a powerful force for good.
By the way, anarchy isn't a political system. It's the lack of one.
There is one other problem with democracy: how exactly do you interpret the will of the majority? Is it better to look at people's first choices and put the #1 in power (single-option winner-take-all)? Or is it better to give people a greater chance to express their views, but someone can win without being #1 on anybody's ballot (Borda Count). And what about representation? Proportional or regional? What about gridlock and the refusal to compromise? I have ideas about some of these, but everyone has different ones.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 05:07 PM |
|
|
Baklava: Education is completely different thing from intelligence.
A highly educated person may be not very intelligent.
A person with just a few grades may be very intelligent, but life forced him/her to stop learning or he just was bothered by education.
So, I wouldn't say "dumb, uneducated", because those two are completely different things.
I agree that dumb people shouldn't vote. But I completely disagree when it comes to uneducated.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:05 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 18:08, 19 Apr 2008.
|
Quote:
Not necessarily.
In 90% of cases, it does.
Quote:
A good democracy respects individuality.
But you still need to be ruled by whoever the mass chooses.
Quote:
On the other hand, in a democracy it is easier to get rid of a corrupt politician than in any other system.
Actually, not really. Technically speaking, the easiest systems to get rid of corrupt politicians are national-socialism and stalinism (they simply shot them, or sent them to Siberia, or something). Though democratic countries also have ways to put corrupt politicians down, a process to prove someone's guilt, with all the lawyers and trials and everything is so long and expensive that they don't even bother most of the time.
Please don't think I'm saying that national-socialism and stalinism are more effective. I'm just responding to your point.
Quote:
By the way, anarchy isn't a political system. It's the lack of one.
I forgot to put "or" in the bracket, in front of "anarchy". My bad.
Don't worry, I'm fully aware that anarchy is impossible currently. It's a transcendent form of politics that just cannot work in the conditions that we have now.
That's why I added an interrogation mark too.
@Doomforge
If a person is bothered by education, then he's bothered with voting.
I'm aware of the difference between intelligence and education, but if a person is intelligent, that still doesn't mean he is good at understanding politics. On the other hand, a person which is educated yet dumb is more probable to believe in a lie told by a politician and can easily be swayed.
What I said is highly intertwined with my view of education - it should be free, it should take just enough time so that everybody can finish it, and measures should be taken to diminish the corruption in the school system (for example, someone has a powerful dad, or is a good football player and everybody just lets him pass. Somebody has got to stop that). It would be hard, yes, but schooling system's a bit off-topic right now.
What I'm saying is this:
- upgrade the schooling system so that everybody has to earn his/her success in school fairly, yet everyone can finish it if they make an effort. It would also have to be free. At least elementary and high school.
- add a few classes of political awareness, philosophy and logic to the schooling system (not too complex, of course. For those who don't understand why philosophy and logic, the explanation is simple: those subjects practice thinking, or at least are supposed to)
- diminish school corruption as much as possible
- only allow people who have finished at least medium-level schooling (high schools) to vote
- grant people with higher education higher voting power.
That's all just my opinion, of course.
And, though I do tend to be a dreamer on these matters, I'm fully aware how hard it would be to implement even the slightest of changes into the system, but some change needs to be done.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:09 PM |
|
|
sure. Although I don't agree with
Quote:
- only allow people who have finished at least medium-level schooling (high schools) to vote
- grant people with higher education higher voting power.
I've met lots of idiots in high school, political idiots that is - brainwashed by TV, believing in EVERYTHING media said. I've seen more people after elementary school resistant to propaganda than in high school. The problem with voting is not the intelligence of the voters imho, but their susceptibility to propaganda in medias.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:19 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 18:20, 19 Apr 2008.
|
Hence the classes of political awareness, philosophy and logic. You present students with options, you teach them to think with their own heads, and you get voters that are harder to manipulate.
That's why no one ever proposed such a schooling system, or at least no one from the top allowed it. Nobody likes ruling people that they can't fully control.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
In 90% of cases, it does.
Well, the Western European democracies are only moderately supportive of the free market.
Quote:
But you still need to be ruled by whoever the mass chooses.
But the power of the person the mass chooses should be limited to where it can't infringe on individual rights.
Quote:
Technically speaking, the easiest systems to get rid of corrupt politicians are national-socialism and stalinism (they simply shot them, or sent them to Siberia, or something).
I meant for the common man to get rid of them, not for the one in power.
Quote:
Though democratic countries also have ways to put corrupt politicians down, a process to prove someone's guilt, with all the lawyers and trials and everything is so long and expensive that they don't even bother most of the time.
I mean removing them from office by not voting for them next time.
Regarding the education debate, it seems that too often people just have their parents' view, and it's difficult to get themm to think otherwise - ever.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But the power of the person the mass chooses should be limited to where it can't infringe on individual rights.
Of course. Unfortunately, that is not the case. There are institutions and people who are simply given licenses to do anything, to defend "the interests of the country". Especially "security" services, such as CIA, Mossad and others. Beside, a president (and his cabinet) have the power declare war on another country - and that is the ultimate infringement of individual rights of people both in his own and the attacked country.
Quote:
I meant for the common man to get rid of them, not for the one in power.
I mean removing them from office by not voting for them next time.
Once a politician seizes power, he doesn't get off so easy. Even if everything is completely fair (and if you want a person to step down from a seat of power cause he's corrupt, you can't expect him to play fair) you have to wait all the way until the next elections, and that can give him quite enough time to solidify his might. Not to mention the rigging of the elections which is still present far and wide.
Quote:
Regarding the education debate, it seems that too often people just have their parents' view, and it's difficult to get themm to think otherwise - ever.
One can only be controlled by his parents for so long. Sooner or later, most people start being independent.
And if he was educated to respect other people's opinions and to encourage independent thought, he will be able to pass that to his child one day.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 06:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Once a politician seizes power, he doesn't get off so easy.
 Did I actually say that?
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 07:08 PM |
|
|
like the rock comparison, Baklava!
Democracy is more about a popularity contest rather than the ability to govern.
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 07:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Beside, a president (and his cabinet) have the power declare war on another country - and that is the ultimate infringement of individual rights of people both in his own and the attacked country.
What if it's in self-defense? But otherwise I agree.
Quote:
Not to mention the rigging of the elections which is still present far and wide.
Not in a good democracy.
Quote:
One can only be controlled by his parents for so long. Sooner or later, most people start being independent.
Lol, where I live, being independent of parents means going to parties and getting drunk, not having different political views. It's very unfortunate. But people seem to have their parents' views, even if no one is forcing them to.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 07:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
-It respects the will of the majority of people
Not neccesarily
Quote:
-It introduces the senate and various councils that make it harder for the person on top to draw all the strings
corruption exists
Quote:
Democratic countries are usualy more advanced in terms of technology
not really,take united kingdom for example,they are under rule of queen and are almost advanced as america
Quote:
-Corruption level can be very high
depends how good politician's are watched on,around here our politicians cant go to toilet without press following them.
Quote:
-Democratic countries tend to look down on countries with any other political system, and can get quite aggressive unless they are afraid of that other country
Only applies to asia and middle east
Quote:
-Free market can easily get out of hand and even become part of the ruling class of sorts (capitalism). This creates new problems, with corporations pursuing some goals of theirs, mostly making money, sometimes causing people to suffer (tobacco industry, oil industry, several types of ecologically harmful industry), but they are untouchable since the entire nation’s economy depends on them
That is goverment's fault for making themselves so dependant on those corporations
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 08:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
-It respects the will of the majority of people
Not neccesarily
It represents the will of the plurality of the people, which is different from a majority.
Quote:
not really,take united kingdom for example,they are under rule of queen and are almost advanced as america
The queen doesn't rule. The UK is a parliamentary democracy.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 08:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It represents the will of the plurality of the people, which is different from a majority.
and that is a problem.
And what you said about UK is not totally true.
Goverment:
Parliamentary democracy and Constitutional monarchy
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 08:22 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think that the question is not "is Democracy good?" but "is there any better regime than Democracy?"
On other words, my question is, for anyone who believes the Democracy isn't the best, what regime he believes to be the best? You can mention different existing ones, or even to mention your own ideas to a new kind of regime.
Social-democracy.Look at Seeden,Norway or Finland.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 08:35 PM |
|
|
|
Yet look the costs in those countries.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 09:05 PM |
|
|
Darkshadow: Yes, but the queen doesn't actually do anything. Her duties are purely ceremonial.
Seraphim: Social democracy is still a form of democracy. And I don't think that it's the best one.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted April 19, 2008 09:11 PM |
|
|
Social-Democracy is the best, with progressive taxing like in Finland it's even better than in Sweden where there's even taxing, but welfare state like this costs a damn lot. Finland has been ripping it down since 90-93 depression. You are gonna need a rich state to keep it up.
As for huge taxing and living costs in these countries I think it's just. Known fact is that if contry doesn't have big class differences it isn't gonna have those big disagreements about it.
Lately the right have been winning the elections and I'm fearing that people are becoming more selfish from day to day. Doctors with their six grans a month have been fighting for more pay amost yearly. State has been letting go of their holdings in market and they are aiming for a "free market" (if you can't read or are just dumn it means capitalism) and now they are outsourcing the healthcare and are putting it in the stock exchange!
A good case in point is this:
Nurses were fighting for more pay a while ago which is just since their pay is almost next to none and has been in the waiting line because of some bigger accidents because the nurses(most of them, some, mostly head nurses who get big payments wanted to have it then) didn't want to compromise the patients health.
The best part is this: The result was a prosentual raise to pay. Quess how much does this raise the income of an ordinary nurse? That's right almost not at all! Now guess how much does it raise the pay of those nurses who were negotiating and who work as a head nurses? Right yet again! Tremendously! This doesn't look too good. 
Baklava's idea of giving the votes only to the educated, and thus rich, citizen is the last thing you'll wanna do in a democracy. Shees do you think they would be all good and thoughtful? It would become an aristocracy where are poor and "lesser" people would suffer but the aristocracy would thrive. That's pretty far from democracy if you ask me.
And if someone here calls USA a democracy he should look in the mirror and be ashamed.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
| |
|
|
