• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • 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!

What would it take for you to stop supporting representative government?

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,609
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

5 reasons for Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff to worry - CNN.com
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
26,437
Reaction score
23,041
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

5 reasons for Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff to worry - CNN.com

You are suspiciously mixing several subjects as if to suggest that all representative governments end in a manner that Brazil is headed towards. And the last thing that Brazil needs is some sort of military style governance over the nation.

The current President, Rousseff, is not fighting impeachment because of some failure of representative government either. She is nothing more than a corrupt politician, an aristocrat, who is lining her own pocket while the nation's economic faults come to the surface at the wrong possible time. When they are only months away from hosting the Olympics. Between issues of basic services failure and the Zika outbreak the nation is in serious trouble and their President is too arrogant to do much about it.

Brazil is about to experience a spectacular failure that will take generations to dig out of, but your question is suspect as if that is the reason for the pending disaster we will all watch.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

5 reasons for Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff to worry - CNN.com

"Representative government" is terrible at its best. Authority figures are supposed to lead their subjects, not follow their whims.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A representative government, such as exists in most of the more prosperous and peaceful nations throughout the world, is a terrible way to govern.

But, it is still the best way human beings have come up with so far. It's still way ahead of a military dictatorship or a theocracy, such as exists in many of the less fortunate nations of the Earth.

Freedom works.
 

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,609
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
A representative government, such as exists in most of the more prosperous and peaceful nations throughout the world, is a terrible way to govern.

But, it is still the best way human beings have come up with so far. It's still way ahead of a military dictatorship or a theocracy, such as exists in many of the less fortunate nations of the Earth.

Freedom works.

Representative government doesn't yield freedom unless you have a virtuous society. When the majority auction off their vote to whomever gives them the most free stuff, that society's goose is cooked. Brazil was better off in 1974 than it is today.
 

Mithrae

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
5,689
Reaction score
2,616
Location
Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Representative government doesn't yield freedom unless you have a virtuous society.

Out of interest, what style government does yield freedom under all circumstances?

Heck, what style of government yields even as much or more freedom than representative democracy under any circumstances?
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
16,632
Reaction score
21,897
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Your thread title asks "What would it take for you to stop supporting representative government?"

My counter-question is: As opposed to what?

The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

Your OP offer is a military junta? The many who miss it are those who profited most from it. The rich who were immune to abuse, the soldier families who could lord it over the rest of the population, and of course the members of the junta itself who had absolute power.

I've also seen some members argue for other forms of authoritarian government. Monarchy, Dictatorship, etc.

The argument (which has some minor merit) is that most people are too self-centered to think in terms of the good of the many. They are so focused on trying to make their own way that they have little or no time to think about anything else. As such they can be easily led like sheep; so why not let the best people lead them? The cream at the top.

The problem with this is that the cream at the top are often the most successful at being selfish and self-centered. Sometimes by hard work, but just as often by just plain luck they have the kind of wealth and security that gives them the leisure time to think outside the box. This does not necessarily make them good leaders, as we've seen time and again demonstrated throughout history.

Representative government is the best option out of a lot of bad options. It gives anyone the opportunity to rise to leadership from among the masses. IMO people who seek more authoritarian forms typically believe they know what's best for everyone else, and they would be among those best suited to lead the herd themselves. Why get elected? Just be born to it, or maintain power by using mercenaries and brute force.

I don't think we need more centralized power. IMO an educated, informed population with an opportunity to participate in representative government beats any government that "makes the trains run on time" at the point of a gun any day.
 
Last edited:

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,680
Reaction score
45,532
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
A representative government, such as exists in most of the more prosperous and peaceful nations throughout the world, is a terrible way to govern.

But, it is still the best way human beings have come up with so far. It's still way ahead of a military dictatorship or a theocracy, such as exists in many of the less fortunate nations of the Earth.

Freedom works.
Hear! Hear! :thumbs:
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Trump's candidacy only reinforces my personal belief that the average man has precious little to contribute to actual policy making. While I don't support a radical change to our political system at the moment, give me a few Trump-like presidents and then get back to me.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

5 reasons for Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff to worry - CNN.com

A technocracy may be better.
Hasn't been tried yet, but at this point I may be persuaded to give it a go.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The argument (which has some minor merit) is that most people are too self-centered to think in terms of the good of the many. They are so focused on trying to make their own way that they have little or no time to think about anything else. As such they can be easily led like sheep; so why not let the best people lead them? The cream at the top.

This is a misrepresentation of the authoritarian argument.

The average person should be primarily concerned with their own life and that of their family, friends, and neighbors. It simply isn't a reasonable expectation for everyone to direct their own lives to the good of the whole.

And we're under no illusions as to the virtue of the rulers. The rulers in an authoritarian monarchy will be just as virtuous or vicious as anyone else, the difference between hereditary rule and democratic rule is that a monarch as least can be virtuous, as there is no evil required to obtain their office. An elected ruler, on the other hand, must commit many vices (boasting, reviling, etc.) to obtain power. It is better to have a system that will sometimes produce good rulers rather than one that will always produce bad ones.
 

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,609
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Why would that speak against representative democracy? I don't see that at all.

If someone is in Brazil and just wants out of the misery, all options come to mind.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Representative government doesn't yield freedom unless you have a virtuous society. When the majority auction off their vote to whomever gives them the most free stuff, that society's goose is cooked. Brazil was better off in 1974 than it is today.

and dictatorships and theocracies never yield freedom, no matter what.

the meme about "auctioning off votes for free stuff" is simply right wing talking point nonsense. It's not real.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
28,493
Reaction score
14,714
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Free stuff is what got many democrats elected.

Free gas!...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

Obama phones.... free stuff.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio




Obama stash..........https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLBexiCMkXo

Phone subsidies have existed for many years. It was during the Clinton Administration that they updated to cell phones. Bush didn't end the program, and Obama didn't start it.

Free gas? Eat here and get gas?
freebies get the Republicans elected, too.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I already don't support it, so at this point nothing.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
28,493
Reaction score
14,714
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Phone subsidies have existed for many years. It was during the Clinton Administration that they updated to cell phones. Bush didn't end the program, and Obama didn't start it.

Free gas? Eat here and get gas?
freebies get the Republicans elected, too.

Meanwhile...............it's a right wing talking point. Right!
 

Kurmugeon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2012
Messages
6,170
Reaction score
2,008
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Free stuff is what got many democrats elected.
...


The Best of U.S. are so busy doing, and paying, they have few to no children.

The Worst of U.S. are breeding by the litter, with the knowing expectation that they will be provided for by "The Rich".

Devaluation occurring before our very eyes.

How many Generations will it take to reduce America to a colony of mutant morons?

-
 
Last edited:

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,609
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The word "Obamaphones" is a right wing talking point, as is the "they're voting themselves free goodies" meme.

OK, then, how about "Bolsa Familia" and "Minha Casa, Minha Vida". Same Marxist "free goodies", different country, same result.
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The situation in Brazil brings this question to mind. The President's approval rating is 10%, the population has a "free stuff" mentality, corruption is rampant, the economy is about to slip into a 1930's-style depression. Many miss being ruled by the military junta.

5 reasons for Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff to worry - CNN.com

The voters can blame themselves just like our voters can blame themselves for the fact that our country is headed in the same basic direction.
 

Thoreau72

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
29,638
Reaction score
7,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What is representative government, a theory?
 
Top Bottom