Has Democracy failed?

[ocean515]

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.

Well, your thoughts certainly reflect the end game of Progressivism.

Rather than be thwarted by the changing tides of the citizens who are a Nation, under a Progressive regime, it's better to control the people by establishing a regulatory elite of properly vetted bureaucrats who aren't constrained by such frustrating concepts as freedom and liberty defined by the people.

This fact, with it's desire for complete removal of input from the people, is what makes Progressivism the dangerous and contemptible ideology of the day.

It's important for citizens in all countries to familiarize themselves with this fact, and to understand how much money and effort is being expended globally to try and make it a global reality.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

There are some things that should not be voted upon.

We don't vote on whether evolution is true or whether climate change is true. The insane idea of leaving the European Union should never have been up for a vote but the endless yapping of Nigel Farage and other Yokels and David Cameron finally gave in.

Democracy is broken if we have to vote on obvious things.

Sorry but sometimes the people see through the bias media and deception of the rich and powerful uniting to steer the ship in the direction that serves the people.

Again just because there view differs from yours does not make them wrong.

When everyone heads in the same direction everyone may go over the cliff.

Picking the right path can be a guessing game if you never traveled all of them before. Choosing a path with a small opening may be the right choice for a small person but not a large one. Diversity is humanities greatest strength.

 

[code1211]

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.

If you give anyone power and they wield it, they will seek more.

Letting academicians who have never run a business run a fundamentally economic system is not a good thing. It's what's been happening for decades.

The purpose of government is the wise guidance of the system we have that both creates and taxes wealth and wealth creation.

Having elite academicians doing this job is like having any group of everyman's doing any job that they don't understand.

Our current choices for a leader are Crooked Hillary or Crazy Donald.

Given the nature of the job they seek, would you rather have a person with a proven record of creating wealth or a proven record of stealing wealth?

 

[AtlantaAdonis]

You just proved that I was in fact correct about you. You DO want to prevent people with opposing opinions from yours from participating in the democratic process.

Thanks for the confirmation. eace

And you just proved that you don't think objective truth matters. Some things shouldn't be up for a vote. The minimum wage doesn't hurt the economy. Evolution is true. Climate change is real. Why do I need to respect a backward, economically-detrimental, xenophobic ideology?

 

[TobyOne]

Scratch a liberal, reveal a fascist. Just another example of the left's underlying motives.

 

[Renae]

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.

Whose fault is that? You blame the system, you think having multiple choices in a parliamentary system is better? Right.

 

[Renae]

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.

We are a Representative Republic. Words matter Spud.

 

[Helix]

Whose fault is that? You blame the system, you think having multiple choices in a parliamentary system is better? Right.

banning political parties outright is my favorite solution. short of that, end gerrymandering by redrawing all districts using a computer and census data, and loosen the stranglehold that the duopoly has on ballot access.

 

[Renae]

banning political parties outright is my favorite solution. short of that, end gerrymandering by redrawing all districts using a computer and census data, and loosen the stranglehold that the duopoly has on ballot access.

Well since you believe in an absurdity that will never happen, we can dismiss your opinion.

 

[Helix]

Well since you believe in an absurdity that will never happen, we can dismiss your opinion.

never is a long time, and since you are not an authority on "what will never happen," i can dismiss your comment.

 

[Renae]

never is a long time, and since you are not an authority on "what will never happen," i can dismiss your comment.

Name a country that exists without political parties, in all of history. Go ahead.

 

[Rosie1]

Time will tell how bad GB's decision was, economically. I don't think opting out of the EU is a good decision.

As far as voting on climate change and evolution (just the concepts)..too bad we can't. As that would be idiotic and harmless, lol.

 

[spud_meister]

We are a Representative Republic. Words matter Spud.

Words do matter, and a democracy is not the same as a Democracy.

 

[spud_meister]

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.

Democracy is more likely to produce good governance, and is a more stable system than any other. Autocracy can result in good governance, but there's no way to redress it, other than violence, if it doesn't.

 

[Henrin]

Words do matter, and a democracy is not the same as a Democracy.

What?

...

 

[Helix]

Name a country that exists without political parties, in all of history. Go ahead.

i didn't argue that any country has enacted the non-partisan system that i would prefer. doesn't mean that it shouldn't be attempted. at the very least, addressing gerrymandering should be a top national priority.

 

[Renae]

i didn't argue that any country has enacted the non-partisan system that i would prefer. doesn't mean that it shouldn't be attempted. at the very least, addressing gerrymandering should be a top national priority.

"National Priority, meaningless reform of voting districts to make Congress...." what exactly?

 

[Helix]

"National Priority, meaningless reform of voting districts to make Congress...." what exactly?

as i said, i support determining all districts using census data only. allowing politicians to basically draw their own districts is the very definition of conflict of interest. feel free to defend gerrymandering, though. should make for an interesting discussion.

 

[iguanaman]

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.

Can people fail? Yes but that doesn't mean people are over does it? The Brexit vote should never have been held. Most voters had no clue what they were voting for and that is why they are leaving. They are now calling having regrexit and rightly so.

 

[Renae]

as i said, i support determining all districts using census data only. allowing politicians to basically draw their own districts is the very definition of conflict of interest. feel free to defend gerrymandering, though. should make for an interesting discussion.

I agree it would be better if we didn't have carved out districts, but the moment you try that and you're a racist. You do realize that right? Also, it's not nearly the issue as a public not carrying out their civic duties. If the PEOPLE did their jobs, gerrymandering wouldn't matter a whit. But the more we push for and accept "entitlements" the more stupid the voting public. "Vote for me, I'll stick it to them rich folks and give you your FAIR SHARE!!" is a SERIOUSLY far more damaging affair then carved out districts. But whatever, you're focused on the meaningless, it is your right after all to do so.

 

[spud_meister]

What?

...

Democracy, with a big D, refers to a specific system of government, democracy, with a little d, refers to any system of government where people vote.

 

[Helix]

I agree it would be better if we didn't have carved out districts, but the moment you try that and you're a racist. You do realize that right? Also, it's not nearly the issue as a public not carrying out their civic duties. If the PEOPLE did their jobs, gerrymandering wouldn't matter a whit. But the more we push for and accept "entitlements" the more stupid the voting public. "Vote for me, I'll stick it to them rich folks and give you your FAIR SHARE!!" is a SERIOUSLY far more damaging affair then carved out districts. But whatever, you're focused on the meaningless, it is your right after all to do so.

i support using only population density data to draw the districts. political leanings and racial data should not be considered.

 

[Renae]

i support using only population density data to draw the districts. political leanings and racial data should not be considered.

That's wonderful, will never happen, and in the end is merely a symptom of the loss of civic duty and over all intelligence of the voting public, not a cause. Ergo, it's an irrelevant thing to give a **** about at this time.

 

[Helix]

That's wonderful, will never happen, and in the end is merely a symptom of the loss of civic duty and over all intelligence of the voting public, not a cause. Ergo, it's an irrelevant thing to give a **** about at this time.

it's THE relevant thing to give a **** about, because it adversely affects everything else. and it CAN happen if we demand it. we just need the right platform to bring the issue to light and to get 60 percent of voters pissed off enough to demand a change. in the age of social media, it's possible for one person to start that fire, though getting politicians to enact changes which are deleterious to them personally will be very difficult. still, the fact remains, this is one of the biggest root problems in the political process.

 

[SailaWay]

yes indeed it has failed..... look what happened to rhodesia and south africa after turning to democracy.. where the IQ's of voters dropped like a rock.. HUMANS are designed to COPY progress so liberalism will fall world wide.. Chinas change to conservative has sent their progress soaring with the highest GDP scores .. america's wise founders only had the highest IQ's to vote... and used a property test to find which while males has enough wisdom to vote.. women could own property but could not vote because seen as less wise same as blacks and indians and that then brought the wise of the world to america to help build the greatest nation on earth.. it has been falling because of wider democracy and the IQ's of its voters dropping to record lows each and every day