• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you believe in Democracy?

Do you believe in Democracy?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 24 55.8%
  • No.

    Votes: 14 32.6%
  • I hate the government.

    Votes: 5 11.6%

  • Total voters
    43
No. I "Believe" in the redemptive power of Christ. I "Believe" that God is alive in this world. I do not "Believe" in democracy simply because democracy itself is not some kind of Hegelian uber-force directing history as it sees' fit towards a pre-determined end or even in a deliberate direction.

I do think that representative, liberal government (classic sense) tends to be the least worst of the models humanity has figured out thus far. But do I "Believe" in the moral superiority of the all-guiding wisdom of my fellow human beings when there are more of them? No.
 
Believe it or not, installing democracy is the name of the game.
 
Believe it or not, installing democracy is the name of the game.

And just where has a democracy been installed lately? The USA supports dictators, or one man rules that can dictate the business terms for their constituents and sell the patrimony of the citizens. Crooks, banksters, gangsters, rental politicians, compromized financial wizards, God-endorsing charlatans, and the like rule the world with a little guidance from old money.
 
And just where has a democracy been installed lately? The USA supports dictators, or one man rules that can dictate the business terms for their constituents and sell the patrimony of the citizens. Crooks, banksters, gangsters, rental politicians, compromized financial wizards, God-endorsing charlatans, and the like rule the world with a little guidance from old money.

Yeah I guess with tons of CIA cash delivered each month to Karzai's office.
 
What happened to the thread originator? He hasn't answered a single question.
 
Democratic participation by the profoundly ignorant ought to be, don't you agree?

The idea that "it is everyone's duty to vote" is swill. It is the duty of everyone who votes to be well informed.
 
Kudos to those who admit to "hating our government".
If nothing else, you are honest....in short supply today...
But, my belief in democracy cannot be 100%.
We do NOT have the overall quality of people for this..
But things are improving, slowly.
Even now, too many believe its OK for so few to have so much of the money supply...(the overpaying of "stars")
The exact percentage is unknown to me..
 
I believe in One Man, One Vote. I'm the man, and I get to vote. It's the perfect democracy.

(So I stole that from Pratchett, leave me alone)
Men only voting is fine as long as they are educated and intelligent.
Today, we have the mob - elected to Congress - and this does NOT work.
 
When it comes to my individual rights, I care not what the mob thinks. Our rights are specifically the kinds of things that cannot legally be voted away.

I like the idea of democratically elected officials, because you can get rid of the meddlesome ones. Else Democracy to me is just two wolves and a sheep deciding on whats for dinner. When those that rob Peter to pay Paul always have Paul's support, the thieving and corruption will not end.

In order for democracy to work successfully, we cannot have animals(sheep and wolves) nor mobsters (beggers and thieves) in the equasion...
This we may not have, yet...
We need a better people.
 
In order for democracy to work successfully, we cannot have animals(sheep and wolves) nor mobsters (beggers and thieves) in the equasion...
This we may not have, yet...
We need a better people.
If that's what you think is required then we will never have a democracy. Sheep and wolves are part of human society, as ingrained as huddling together for protection and warmth. You should read some game theory, or re-read it.
 
Another thing that is interesting in this thread is that everyone seems to think everyone else is an idiot, except themselves, of course. No one else is capable of making a wise decision except democratically elected representatives. Really, are our elected representatives such geniuses? How many of our problems ever get fixed? Do they always do the best for the public's interest? It's interesting to hear people complain ad infinitum about how corrupt and unresponsive to the people our elected official's are until a debate about democracy comes up. Then everyone says the current system is the best way for government.

So, a lot of people think they are intelligent, but no one seems to be able to come up with an answer on how to reign in our politicians and make them more accountable to the public well being? Maybe everyone is right and everyone really is an idiot.
 
Last edited:
No one else is capable of making a wise decision except democratically elected representatives.
:lamo I don't know of anyone who believes that! :lamo
 
:lamo I don't know of anyone who believes that! :lamo

Exactly. So why does everyone think democratically elected representatives are better at decision making than the general public is? Aren't they both idiots? At least in a participatory democracy the people get what they vote for. If they get it wrong they pay for their mistakes. In a representative democracy the politicians usually get it wrong and the people still pay for the mistakes.
 
Apparently there's a few who don't understand what the consequences of living in a "true democracy" would be like. NOT GOOD!

It would in effect be a "tribal government". Anything that is not forbidden would be mandatory and God help you if the majority decided that your existence is in the forbidden category.
 
...Another idea I had awhile ago was to finally stop the charade and just privatize the US government, and turn it into US Government, Inc. As a private, for profit, institution it can sell its services to generate the revenue it needs. It then is only responsible to do what is in the best interest of its shareholders. And if you want a say in how you are governed you only have to buy enough shares of US Government, Inc, to get your way. If not, sit back and let US Government, Inc. decide what is the best use for you. By the way, how's that for all you free market fanatics?.....

How would that be different from the present system? We already have the best government money can buy.
 
Exactly. So why does everyone think democratically elected representatives are better at decision making than the general public is? Aren't they both idiots? At least in a participatory democracy the people get what they vote for. If they get it wrong they pay for their mistakes. In a representative democracy the politicians usually get it wrong and the people still pay for the mistakes.
The people get what they vote for, now. There's one thing every politician, except second term presidents, want - another term in office. :)


But to answer your question, you're essentially killing the Senate by doing that. There are reasons it takes both the House and the Senate to pass a law.
 
Exactly. So why does everyone think democratically elected representatives are better at decision making than the general public is? Aren't they both idiots? At least in a participatory democracy the people get what they vote for. If they get it wrong they pay for their mistakes. In a representative democracy the politicians usually get it wrong and the people still pay for the mistakes.

Not only that, but direct democracy has never been tried beyond the smallest and most local levels. The amount of strong opposition to something that has never been tried is interesting.
 
Last edited:
I see from this thread that most people really don't want to be involved in the decision making that affects their lives.

No we do not want to be ruled over by an unfettered democratic quorum.

It makes me wonder if we are not finally ready for some form of World Government.

At this point the World will not be ready of one for Centuries.

How would we like a world government to be? Dictator? Monarch?

Over the dead bodies of those who would try to establish such.

Or should we just let the US government be the world government?

Sorry, our club has standards not just any state can join.

If we let the US government be the world government, then we can finally stop voting and just let Wall St. decide what is best for all of us. I pledge allegiance to the logo, of the Goldman Sachs hegemony....

Wall Street is the finical capital of this world just about. Politicaly if the US is the world government then DC would be the Site of World Government.

Another idea I had awhile ago was to finally stop the charade and just privatize the US government, and turn it into US Government, Inc.

You should understand the States are the Stakeholders in the Federal Government and any thing that is removed from the federal government would go back to Them.

As a private, for profit, institution it can sell its services to generate the revenue it needs.

Much of what the Fed Gov might be done by the private market if privatized doesn't mean that it gets to keep a monopoly status so there goes World Gov right there.

It then is only responsible to do what is in the best interest of its shareholders.

For those functions that are necessary to be held by government (and cannot be privatized) the share holders would be the States or The People depending what function is being referred. By the way just because a corporation is run by a Board doesn't mean that they will do so in the best interests of its shareholders.

And if you want a say in how you are governed you only have to buy enough shares of US Government, Inc, to get your way.

A Corporate Board doesn't need to serve any particular shareholder or the shareholders collectively and without a independent government or organization how can you hold any particular Board to account?

If not, sit back and let US Government, Inc. decide what is the best use for you.

Just another reason why any government by whatever makeup must have strict limits on what it can do.

By the way, how's that for all you free market fanatics?

Obviously what you are describing is not a free market it is Absolute Corporatism.

Maybe all governments could follow the US and privatize.

The US has not "privatized"

Through the magic of free market capitalism we will eventually end up with World Government, Inc.

In a global free market do we need a World Government even? Just some sort of system of treaties between governments so we can have rule of law and established rights and responsibilities under contract law.
 
I happen to like the idea of a Republic...not a Democracy.
 
I notice that some people on the board do not support democracy, so I was curious to see what the overall opinion is.

Yeesh, this is one of the more depressing polls I've seen awhile. The fact that almost half the people on this forum don't believe in a system of government where a country's people can actually have a voice in their future when so many our ancestors suffered (and often died) so we could have one feeds into my growing belief that our political culture is past the point of redeeming itself.

Les Miserables OST 2012 - Do You Hear the People Sing? - YouTube
 
The truth is, these people who really don't like democracy should keep their mouths shut when it is time to pay the bills of the government. So far the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost the taxpayers $2 trillion. The final cost with everything including veteran benefits is estimated to be between 4 and 6 trillion total. If everyone knew what their burden of cost for those wars was, do you think those wars would have survived a referendum? The big banks screamed for decades for a freer market and then when they took advantage of that free market they screw everything up and then turn out to be socialists and asked the government for a handout. How many would have voted in a referendum to give them a $trillion bailout instead of making them pay for their own mistakes? The real cost of that bailout is estimated to be over $10 trillion and it is coming out of our paychecks. Because you have very little say in what the government does, and no way to hold politicians accountable, might as well get your checkbooks ready because the bill is fast becoming extremely expensive. What is the national debt today? And what is your share? What will the national debt be in the next few years? That debt, and its massive interest, gets paid by you, not the government.

More importantly, this thread has demonstrated just how much we distrust each other. No wonder we have lost all sense of community. I really wonder how we got to this point where we trust our government more than our neighbors. No wonder the government can get away with the Patriot Act. Our biggest enemy is our neighbor.

I'll remind everyone again. There are places where there is more participatory democracy than the US and the people are more involved in the government of their lives. These countries are actually far from mob rule and everyone seems to be happier and get along just fine with their neighbors. Switzerland is just one example. The have a much higher quality of life, impressive material well being, but most importantly, they have an enormous amount of social capital. It is this social capital that really allows the good life. Now we know why the average US citizen is always so unhappy and needs a high dose of Prozac just to get through the day: absolutely no social capital.
 
Last edited:
I notice that some people on the board do not support democracy, so I was curious to see what the overall opinion is.


If your talking pure democracy the founders hated it
 
Not only that, but direct democracy has never been tried beyond the smallest and most local levels. The amount of strong opposition to something that has never been tried is interesting.

It was tried in Athens. In a democracy the minority has no rights.
 
Back
Top Bottom