What do we do about the fact that democracy doesn't work?

[SonOfDaedalus]

We've grown up believing that democracy is the best form of government. We've been told that the progress of western economies is because of democracy. But I think we've been misled.

Democracy has worked in the past because a group of elite intellectuals and businessmen controlled our democracy. You couldn't run for office without their support. People voted, but their choices were limited by elites.

There are a lot of negative aspects to a group of elites filtering our candidates. These candidates will tend to work for the interests of the elites. But the alternative is people voting for idiots and charlatans. People voting for Socrates' Sweet Shop Owner.

Go anywhere in the third world and democracy is a disaster. In Russia, the people have given up on it after voting for a fraud and drunk in Boris Yeltsin. They prefer a dictator like Putin to the chaos they had before. In Britain, they let people vote on Brexit. Look how that turned out.

Obama was elected in 2008. That was just the beginning of the smartphone social media era. People don't need the elites to advertise and promote their ideas anymore. There is social media. The world is different now. What worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future.


Why Democracy Doesn’t Deliver

Only 19 percent of Americans today say they can trust their government to do what is right. Meanwhile, citizens in developing countries see authoritarian leaders as more trustworthy than democratic politicians. Increasingly, it seems that people across the globe are skeptical of the ability of democratic governments to act effectively — including as good custodians of the economy. Indeed, the liberal democratic system is unwittingly undermining the economic growth that is necessary for its continued survival.

 

[lwf]

Authoritarian government can work very well... until it doesn't. And when it fails it fails spectacularly and can wipe out entire cultures.

American style democracy is a slow, inefficient, and sometimes embarrassing form of government. But it is self-correcting and kills very few of its citizens.

 

[KevinKohler]

You know the US isn't a democracy, right?

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Authoritarian government can work very well... until it doesn't. And when it fails it fails spectacularly and can wipe out entire cultures.

American style democracy is a slow, inefficient, and sometimes embarrassing form of government. But it is self-correcting and kills very few of its citizens.

You're looking at the past. Things are different now. If Thomas Jefferson were alive and ran for office he would probably lose to someone who is smoother talking, more handsome or charismatic. In the past we had a culture where intellectuals were respected. Today, people want a guy they can have a beer with.

Today we're in a new age. It's a new era.

 

[Grand Mal]

You know the US isn't a democracy, right?

This isn't going to be a 'republic isn't democracy' thing, is it? Because every election in the US (and you have lots of them) is democratic except the presidential election. The US is a democracy.

 

[Crovax]

Authoritarian government can work very well... until it doesn't. And when it fails it fails spectacularly and can wipe out entire cultures.

American style democracy is a slow, inefficient, and sometimes embarrassing form of government. But it is self-correcting and kills very few of its citizens.

If you look at our presidents, the most successful ones have been the most authoritarian

 

[Deuce]

You know the US isn't a democracy, right?

Semantics. Republics are also referred to as a representative democracy.

 

[Xelor]

What do we do about the fact that democracy doesn't work?

Take the Tim Gunn approach, "Make it work."

​

The only people who can make it work are voters. Voters must stop electing cads, boors, "jellyfish" and reprobates.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

If you look at our presidents, the most successful ones have been the most authoritarian

Yeah, ..... no.

 

[Crovax]

Yeah, ..... no.

No... Yeah. Look at all the stuff FDR and Lincoln did that was very authoritative. The entire new deal was strong armed throug the court by threatening to destroy the SCOTUS system.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

No... Yeah. Look at all the stuff FDR and Lincoln did that was very authoritative. The entire new deal was strong armed throug the court by threatening to destroy the SCOTUS system.

Expert references that disagree:

The top 20 presidents in US history, according to historians
The best presidents in US history, according to historians - Business Insider

The Best and Worst Presidents (According to the Stock Market)
The Best and Worst Presidents (According to the Stock Market)
Be happy, Trump is currently number 1.

 

[Carjosse]

You know the US isn't a democracy, right?

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has the genetic signature of a duck, must be a duck.

Has the methods of a democracy, has the institutions of a democracy, democracy is a central value among Americans, must be a democracy.

The US is a representative democracy, that is also a republic. Canada and the UK are also representative democracies but are constitutional monarchies.

 

[Mr Person]

We've grown up believing that democracy is the best form of government. We've been told that the progress of western economies is because of democracy. But I think we've been misled.

Democracy has worked in the past because a group of elite intellectuals and businessmen controlled our democracy. You couldn't run for office without their support. People voted, but their choices were limited by elites.

There are a lot of negative aspects to a group of elites filtering our candidates. These candidates will tend to work for the interests of the elites. But the alternative is people voting for idiots and charlatans. People voting for Socrates' Sweet Shop Owner.

Go anywhere in the third world and democracy is a disaster. In Russia, the people have given up on it after voting for a fraud and drunk in Boris Yeltsin. They prefer a dictator like Putin to the chaos they had before. In Britain, they let people vote on Brexit. Look how that turned out.

Obama was elected in 2008. That was just the beginning of the smartphone social media era. People don't need the elites to advertise and promote their ideas anymore. There is social media. The world is different now. What worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future.


Why Democracy Doesn’t Deliver

Only 19 percent of Americans today say they can trust their government to do what is right. Meanwhile, citizens in developing countries see authoritarian leaders as more trustworthy than democratic politicians. Increasingly, it seems that people across the globe are skeptical of the ability of democratic governments to act effectively — including as good custodians of the economy. Indeed, the liberal democratic system is unwittingly undermining the economic growth that is necessary for its continued survival.

Short: If there's some way to improve our system, it can't be by switching to something that isn't at least partially describable in the terms we now have for systems of government.



Long: What do you mean "doesn't work"? We're not dead....

Working was never the question. The question was: what is the least *****y system that we humans have come up with that lets us govern ourselves without killing each other enough to tear down the government/species?


At this point, the world has seen the whole range from pure monarchy to direct democracy at various times and places. Granted, most governments are incomparable due to the time difference. Any other models have to be a mixture.

For example, if you said "no, a meritocracy". Well, who enforces it? In what structure? Who judges merit, basically, and then who picks the pickers? Whatever the full structure, a government has to be somewhere between monarchy and full/pure democracy.

 

[lwf]

You're looking at the past. Things are different now. If Thomas Jefferson were alive and ran for office he would probably lose to someone who is smoother talking, more handsome or charismatic. In the past we had a culture where intellectuals were respected. Today, people want a guy they can have a beer with.

Today we're in a new age. It's a new era.

I agree. Democracy is only as strong as the average education level of the majority. This is one of those times when a democratic government is inefficient and embarrassing. But it will eventually self balance. Today's era of an incompetent white supremacist administration will lead to tomorrow's era of a well-educated LGBT administration. It just unfortunately doesn't happen on a time table that is sufficient for you or I.

Thanks to American democracy, the current president is guaranteed to be out of power in a little over half a decade or less with little to no bloodshed. An authoritarian government offers no such guarantee. If the authoritarian is wise, this can be a good thing. But imagine if that authoritarian was an incompetent white supremacist? The cons of authoritarianism outweigh the pros when compared to democracy: If not in democracy's worst years, at least over the long haul.

 

[Deuce]

Expert references that disagree:

The top 20 presidents in US history, according to historians
The best presidents in US history, according to historians - Business Insider

The Best and Worst Presidents (According to the Stock Market)
The Best and Worst Presidents (According to the Stock Market)
Be happy, Trump is currently number 1.

Using the stock market as a way to decide who the best president is just comical.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Using the stock market as a way to decide who the best president is just comical.

Not a way to decide, a factor to be considered.

 

[Deuce]

Not a way to decide, a factor to be considered.

Serious question:

Why do you think that is? What part of a stock market index makes a good indicator for a "good president?"

 

[Grokmaster]

We've grown up believing that democracy is the best form of government. We've been told that the progress of western economies is because of democracy. But I think we've been misled.

Democracy has worked in the past because a group of elite intellectuals and businessmen controlled our democracy. You couldn't run for office without their support. People voted, but their choices were limited by elites.

There are a lot of negative aspects to a group of elites filtering our candidates. These candidates will tend to work for the interests of the elites. But the alternative is people voting for idiots and charlatans. People voting for Socrates' Sweet Shop Owner.

Go anywhere in the third world and democracy is a disaster. In Russia, the people have given up on it after voting for a fraud and drunk in Boris Yeltsin. They prefer a dictator like Putin to the chaos they had before. In Britain, they let people vote on Brexit. Look how that turned out.

Obama was elected in 2008. That was just the beginning of the smartphone social media era. People don't need the elites to advertise and promote their ideas anymore. There is social media. The world is different now. What worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future.


Why Democracy Doesn’t Deliver

How about we start a Constitutional Representative Republic instead of a "democracy"?


Oh wait.... WE DID ALREADY!! Der....

 

[soylentgreen]

We've grown up believing that democracy is the best form of government. We've been told that the progress of western economies is because of democracy. But I think we've been misled.

Democracy has worked in the past because a group of elite intellectuals and businessmen controlled our democracy. You couldn't run for office without their support. People voted, but their choices were limited by elites.

There are a lot of negative aspects to a group of elites filtering our candidates. These candidates will tend to work for the interests of the elites. But the alternative is people voting for idiots and charlatans. People voting for Socrates' Sweet Shop Owner.

Go anywhere in the third world and democracy is a disaster. In Russia, the people have given up on it after voting for a fraud and drunk in Boris Yeltsin. They prefer a dictator like Putin to the chaos they had before. In Britain, they let people vote on Brexit. Look how that turned out.

Obama was elected in 2008. That was just the beginning of the smartphone social media era. People don't need the elites to advertise and promote their ideas anymore. There is social media. The world is different now. What worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future.


Why Democracy Doesn’t Deliver

When it comes to social practice america really is the last place anyone should look. As a republic it is a failure and as a democracy it is a fail. It basically is a corrupt system that allows influence by the wealthy to control it. The idea of one man one vote is a joke there.

Third world countries fail for another reason. Similar but different. Again democracy is a case of one man one vote,. But in most of these countries the population is tribal and will follow the will of the head man giving that one person the power to influence and be influenced. Politicians do not have to get the people to believe in them they need only offer the right bribe to the right leader.

And then you go and point to actual dictatorships. The idea that russian have a legitimate vote is laughable. There's is a one party system with limited ability to vote for any other party.

Yet there are countries in europe, sweden, norway or the pacific australia, new zealand where socialist ideals and democracy work quite well. And they work well there because they do not follow the same political structure of the countries you have mentioned.

Your opinion is biased by only pointing out countries where democracy has never really been practiced.

 

[Deuce]

How about we start a Constitutional Representative Republic instead of a "democracy"?


Oh wait.... WE DID ALREADY!! Der....

A republic is also called a representative democracy. Any more semantics to whine about?

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

How about we start a Constitutional Representative Republic instead of a "democracy"?


Oh wait.... WE DID ALREADY!! Der....

Grok go play with ball. We talk.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Serious question:

Why do you think that is? What part of a stock market index makes a good indicator for a "good president?"

A factor/indicator. Are you suggesting that Trump hasn’t effected the stock market?

Two years in, Trump holds stock market bragging rights
Two years in, Trump holds stock market bragging rights | Reuters

(Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump has taken credit for the stock market's gains during his nearly two years in the White House, and those claims are reasonable given the impact of tax cuts and pro-business policies on investor sentiment.

The S&P 500 has risen 28 percent since Trump's election in November 2016 to the eve of congressional midterm elections on Tuesday. This surpasses the market's performance over the same time frame under any other president in the past 64 years. Under President Dwight Eisenhower, the S&P 500 rose 29 percent from his election in November 1952 through November 1954.

Sweeping corporate tax cuts, an initiative driven by Trump, supercharged U.S. companies' earnings and helped lift the cash-rich technology sector. The Republican party last year passed the biggest overhaul of the U.S. tax code in over 30 years, boosting U.S. corporate earnings.


Here’s President Trump’s stock-market scorecard after 2 years in office
Here’s President Trump’s stock-market scorecard after 2 years in office - MarketWatch

Jan. 20 marked two full years since the real estate mogul and the reality TV star was sworn in as president. In that time, stocks have rallied to records, making him among the most successful Republican presidents when judged by market gains. In fact, the Nasdaq soared 29% since January 2017, marking the tech-centric index’s best rally under a Republican president, according to Dow Jones Market Data.

But a rough 2018 dented Trump’s two-year performance, which for the S&P 500 left him with the 10th best percentage gain of 23 presidents, going back to Herbert Hoover, and the fifth best performance out of 11 Republican presidents, the data show.

 

[Deuce]

A factor/indicator. Are you suggesting that Trump hasn’t effected the stock market?

That wasn't the question I asked, nor was it what I said. Try again. Or don't.

 

[jnug]

No... Yeah. Look at all the stuff FDR and Lincoln did that was very authoritative. The entire new deal was strong armed throug the court by threatening to destroy the SCOTUS system.

Well it might help to recognize Lincoln was headlong into a Civil War and FDR had this little deal called WW2 going on. Plus FDR was trying to pull us out of a depression from which for a very long time looked like we would never recover.

Authoritarianism to get in more rounds of golf just isn't doing it for me. Putting one's approach shot in a sand trap just does not make it up on the totem as high as the Civil War and WW2.