Has Democracy failed?

[_Sal]

democracy and it's process hasn't changed one iota in thousands of years, and people haven't become more stupid we've always been controlled by average which has never been good and never will be since average is

well, average

we merely have access to the bigger picture and because we are a global economy we are now directly affected by average all over the world

frightening really but 'normal'

another scary concept to embrace

 

[Henrin]

No, I want uneducated people with limited education making very important decisions. The UK wasn't voting on what kind of potato chips to have at the NASCAR party. This was about leaving the European Union.

Do you have anything to show that the UK people are uneducated? I would like to see it considering that 99% of the population is considered literate.

Btw, do you see anything wrong with the following:

"Uneducated people with limited education"

 

[Cephus]

I call them stupid for wanting to leave the EU, just like I would call them stupid if they passed a law requiring people to stick their tongues in an electrical socket.

You have no clue what democracy actually is, do you?

 

[ttwtt78640]

We have the rise of Donald Trump in the US. We have the uneducated populace of the UK voting to drop out of the European Union. Is it time to start asking some uncomfortable questions about the fundamental nature of democracy itself?

Don't get me wrong, here. I don't favor autocracy or dictatorship. But just think about it...you wouldn't want a brain surgeon designing a bridge that you drive on or an engineer performing brain surgery on you. Why do we let uneducated masses make our most important decisions?

In my opinion, government should be a panel of social scientists, economists, and evolutionary biologists drafted out of academia. We need to have people who don't actively seek out power having power.

Just a few thoughts.

Isn't that (bolded above) exactly what a referendum on a specific issue is? What you fear is having the people not in power (the general public) object to policies that you happen to prefer. Evolution, which you claim to support, is based upon survival of the fittest which includes letting the weakest be left behind (or culled by predators) to benefit the majority of the herd. It may not seem smart, or "fair" in your liberal academic sense of the word, but it has proven to be quite effective over time.

 

[spud_meister]

We have the rise of Donald Trump in the US. We have the uneducated populace of the UK voting to drop out of the European Union. Is it time to start asking some uncomfortable questions about the fundamental nature of democracy itself?

Don't get me wrong, here. I don't favor autocracy or dictatorship. But just think about it...you wouldn't want a brain surgeon designing a bridge that you drive on or an engineer performing brain surgery on you. Why do we let uneducated masses make our most important decisions?

In my opinion, government should be a panel of social scientists, economists, and evolutionary biologists drafted out of academia. We need to have people who don't actively seek out power having power.

Just a few thoughts.

You're not in favour of autocracy, but you want unelected elites ruling unchecked an unrepresented populace. :roll:

 

[eohrnberger]

Democracy was supposed to be about making difficult decisions. Staying in the EU is a no-brainer, yet the Bubbas and Jim Bobs in the UK voted to get out.

I don't understand how you believe that you know so much better what's the best for the UK electorate. Why is it that you are so arrogant about it? Believing that you do know what's best for someone else; that those who disagree, those who actually are living in the situation they are in, can't manage a 'No-Brainer' decision with which you appear to only have a passing familiarization with.

See what I mean? You disagree with what the majority decided so you call them stupid. THank you for making my point for me.

And no, that is not what democracy was supposed to be about.

Exactly.

 

[LowDown]

Democracy was supposed to be about making difficult decisions. Staying in the EU is a no-brainer, yet the Bubbas and Jim Bobs in the UK voted to get out.

Gosh, left wingers don't get their way and all of a sudden we are talking about how democracy has failed and how the country is ungovernable. What a bunch of tedious nonsense.

 

[zimmer]

We have the rise of Donald Trump in the US. We have the uneducated populace of the UK voting to drop out of the European Union. Is it time to start asking some uncomfortable questions about the fundamental nature of democracy itself?

Don't get me wrong, here. I don't favor autocracy or dictatorship. But just think about it...you wouldn't want a brain surgeon designing a bridge that you drive on or an engineer performing brain surgery on you. Why do we let uneducated masses make our most important decisions?

In my opinion, government should be a panel of social scientists, economists, and evolutionary biologists drafted out of academia. We need to have people who don't actively seek out power having power.

Just a few thoughts.

What is happening is Democracy's finest hour.

The arrogant elites have just realized, actions and inactions have CONSEQUENCES. They tried shoving crap down the throats of the public, they left borders open... and the public revolted... AT THE BALLOT BOX.

Make no mistake... Brexit (Farage/Ukip) and Trump are ohhhh so similar in sentiment.

Frau Merkel deserves ample credit for the EU result. Her invitation that resulted in a Tsunami last summer was the Mother of All Disconnects. It was the truckload of bricks that broke the camel's back.

Obama and the Demokrats are Frau Merkel, Amerikan Style.

The Internet is partially to credit, as it is an end-round to the Socialist Propagandists.

It is... Once again... Democracy's Finest Hour.

With Hillary extending the Endless Clinton Scandal Train, the only hope for Demokrats is if she is indicted. She should be perp-walked in cuffs. THAT would send a signal to the country that there is hope... And a new Socialist would give Demokrats a half assed chance in November. Then again... Not likely as Bernie has no chance, and the remainder of replacements are establishment Socialists.

 

[zimmer]

Democracy was supposed to be about making difficult decisions. Staying in the EU is a no-brainer, yet the Bubbas and Jim Bobs in the UK voted to get out.

You missed the no-brainier...

But that's expected, as you Progressives, Libs, Independents, Moderates... Anything but accurately calling yourselves Socialists... Whatever you call yourselves this week...

You've been wrong on virtually every major issue during the past 70-years...

...and...

... This has come at a massive cost to the people you claimed you wanted to "help".

Your types were wrong about the EU (Thatcher was right).

You were wrong about keeping the Pound Sterling.

You were wrong about the USSR.

Your were wrong about The Great Society and Fair Deal.

Wrong about how to lift Black America.

All these schemes and ideas... Wrong, wrong, wrong... And in the US it has cost us TRILLIONS of debt, jobs and created misery.

And we should listen to those who have been wrong on just about every major issue for 70-years??? ROTFLOL.

No... Errrrr... NO!!!

Everything you've touched has gone down the crapper... And you still don't learn.

And yet... You still soldier on... Like lemmings, blind... Ignorant lemmings walking off the cliff.

The no-brainier... Is your types don't learn from the lessons of history. How can you... Your Socialist inspired ideology would cease to exist if you did.

 

[PoS]

no. the gerrymandered duopoly system is approaching failure, though.

Let's hope it takes down the monolithic, centralized governments run by the establishment with it.

 

[Helix]

Let's hope it takes down the monolithic, centralized governments run by the establishment with it.

and who will fill that power void is the question.

 

[Renae]

no. the gerrymandered duopoly system is approaching failure, though.

You're really stuck on that gerrmander excuse for the stupidity of the public aren't you?

 

[Renae]

Let's hope it takes down the monolithic, centralized governments run by the establishment with it.

Ergo, the fall of Democracies historically to Despotism, because people are stupid.

 

[Renae]

We have the rise of Donald Trump in the US. We have the uneducated populace of the UK voting to drop out of the European Union. Is it time to start asking some uncomfortable questions about the fundamental nature of democracy itself?

Don't get me wrong, here. I don't favor autocracy or dictatorship. But just think about it...you wouldn't want a brain surgeon designing a bridge that you drive on or an engineer performing brain surgery on you. Why do we let uneducated masses make our most important decisions?

In my opinion, government should be a panel of social scientists, economists, and evolutionary biologists drafted out of academia. We need to have people who don't actively seek out power having power.

Just a few thoughts.

Simple answer to your silliness; We don't live in a Democracy.

 

[spud_meister]

Simple answer to your silliness; We don't live in a Democracy.

Except you do, a representative democracy.

 

[Renae]

Except you do, a representative democracy.

Except we don't, we live in a Representative Republic.

An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic

 

[Gaztopian]

Democracy is inherently a terrible regime. It bewitches only because it grants unprecedented freedoms and prosperity, albeit for a short period of time. Since excess leads to excess in the opposite direction, it's bound to conduce to a tormenting paucity of the very same things it vaunts as its merits.

None of that will fly with a member of a democratic regime approaching its twilight years, as he knew nothing in his life but a dogma that deifies democracy. Like other believers, he'll wriggle his way out of any attempts to empirically persuade him otherwise. Not that it matters; I'm going to sit back and enjoy the show. After all, I have two coliseums promising much entertainment, the UK and the US.

 

[Gaztopian]

You're not in favour of autocracy, but you want unelected elites ruling unchecked an unrepresented populace. :roll:

I don't understand this axiom that only democracy is capable of holding the rulers accountable. Ironically enough, today's democratic regimes are often maligned for their inability to do just that. There's nothing inherently incompatible between such "democratic" processes and say, monarchic regimes.

 

[Northern Light]

After doing a survey of governments in the west over the past 300 years or so, I find it's based on cycles. A newer, more liberal system comes into place and remains there until its inherent flaws become exposed by humanity's natural predilection for power and control. It's at that point the system fails, or crumbles, or there's a revolution, and then it gets redesigned. Human politics and government are evolving just like anything else, so we grow to the point that we are more intelligent than the system our predecessors invented, and start to circumvent it. That's what we're seeing now, as a matter of due course.

I don't think democracy has failed, but it is reaching the limitations of its current form vs. the cleverness of non-government powers. Within the next cycle, we will likely incorporate the means to remedy these power leaks. For now, they are running amok. The mistake people in democracies always make is assuming that their democracy is an end-of-the-road kind of setup, in a linear fashion. This is usually due to ignorance of history. Democracy is a point on a circle, not the end of a straight line.

Brexit has little bearing on the situation. Britain will still have to submit to a regionality that it's not part of in order to have a modicum of economy, unless it wants to join the Chinese/U.S. axis more strongly in order to make ends meet. The globalists will still get their piece of Britain. The one thing they won't get from it is porous borders.

 

[Helix]

You're really stuck on that gerrmander excuse for the stupidity of the public aren't you?

yeah, i'm fairly annoyed that the Fisher Price My First Political Parties[sup]TM[/sup] have used their duopoly to limit the choice to two piss poor candidates pretty much every election cycle. you should be, too.

 

[_Sal]

After doing a survey of governments in the west over the past 300 years or so, I find it's based on cycles. A newer, more liberal system comes into place and remains there until its inherent flaws become exposed by humanity's natural predilection for power and control. It's at that point the system fails, or crumbles, or there's a revolution, and then it gets redesigned. Human politics and government are evolving just like anything else, so we grow to the point that we are more intelligent than the system our predecessors invented, and start to circumvent it. That's what we're seeing now, as a matter of due course.

I don't think democracy has failed, but it is reaching the limitations of its current form vs. the cleverness of non-government powers. Within the next cycle, we will likely incorporate the means to remedy these power leaks. For now, they are running amok. The mistake people in democracies always make is assuming that their democracy is an end-of-the-road kind of setup, in a linear fashion. This is usually due to ignorance of history. Democracy is a point on a circle, not the end of a straight line.

Brexit has little bearing on the situation. Britain will still have to submit to a regionality that it's not part of in order to have a modicum of economy, unless it wants to join the Chinese/U.S. axis more strongly in order to make ends meet. The globalists will still get their piece of Britain. The one thing they won't get from it is porous borders.

I like this. I believe it to be true.

 

[spud_meister]

Except we don't, we live in a Representative Republic.

An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic

Did you not read your own link? It draws a very clear distinction between big D and little d democracy. As the OP cleary has a little d in mind, your particular bit of semantic isn't applicable.

 

[spud_meister]

I don't understand this axiom that only democracy is capable of holding the rulers accountable. Ironically enough, today's democratic regimes are often maligned for their inability to do just that. There's nothing inherently incompatible between such "democratic" processes and say, monarchic regimes.

Because only with democracy do people actually hold power, if only in a limited way. Autocratic governments rule by whim.

 

[Fletch]

Because only with democracy do people actually hold power, if only in a limited way. Autocratic governments rule by whim.

Correct. And it is the whim driven, autocratic dictates of the EU that caused Britons to vote to have their sovereignty back.

 

[Gaztopian]

Because only with democracy do people actually hold power, if only in a limited way. Autocratic governments rule by whim.

Why should people hold power to begin with? Why is that a prerequisite for accountability? Also, many autocratic regimes are ruled by whim, yes, but that doesn't mean all non-democratic regimes are whimsical. We're back again to that axiom that only democracy can produce good governance where the rulers are accountable for their actions.