Thread: I'm losing my faith in democracy.

When I was growing up I always knew that democracy was the only good and just way to run a country. I mean after all, that's the only fair way to do it. Everyone votes, and the country moves along with the whims of the majority. Of course it is impractical to vote on every single decision so we vote on rules and then elect people to carry out day to day decisions within the confines of our those rules. Always seemed like the ultimate system of governance that ran relatively smoothly and efficiently.

Now though, I'm starting to wonder. The more I see of this world, the more I'm starting to realize that the fatal flaw of a democratic government is that democracy gives equal opportunity to both the smart and the stupid. As the US becomes increasingly polarized, I'm noticing more and more the absolute idiocy that is coming forth as legislators, working together in parties, spend their time appealing to the whims of the lowest common denominator. Herd mentality stupidity is driving ridiculous legislation from people who should know better. The best interests of the country are being ignored in favor of perusing what the uninformed, uneducated and often incorrect think are the best interests of the country.

This begs the question, should we let the stupid vote? Should a minimum level of education be required to cast a vote? Are we not obligated to protect the interests of the majority from the interests of the majority? I'm aware of how morally dangerous this slope is, but don't we do it to some extent already? Children are not permitted to make a large number of decisions, including voting in elections, because they don't know better. Or, in other words, they aren't educated enough to be able to chose what is best for them. Children, are all provided with guardians to make decisions in their best interest. Should this right not also be afforded to those who have passed the age of 18 but still might not know any better.

The best example of the success of a non democratic process is our own judicial system. Federal court Judges, while subject to some quasi democratic confirmation process and subject to some political influence due to the nature of presidential appointment, are by and far one of the parts of our government that is least affected by the varying whims of the public. Picked from the cream of the judicial crop so to speak for one of the most sought after jobs in the world, the people who find their way in to the federal court system are some of the smartest and most educated in the country. And with life long appointments the influences of day to day politics begin to fade. Ask any lawyer who has tried a variety of cases before various elected and appointed judges which set of judges are the more competent, I will guarantee you that he or she will probably respond that it is the judges in the district courts. These people, who represent one of the least democratic parts of our government, yet one of the most educated groups in our society, are the people to whom we have entrusted the biggest and most important responsibility that our government has, protecting us.

Does anybody feel the same way? Is democracy intrinsically flawed? Short of a military coup, the impossibility of implicating any kind of change of this magnitude to our government means that this is purely an academic question...

Why do you think you aren't stupid?

LMAO
........

retarded blog bro

Originally Posted by Phill

The best interests of the country are being ignored in favor of perusing what the uninformed, uneducated and often incorrect think are the best interests of the country.

I'm not the grammar nazi or anything, but this gave me a little chuckle.

interesting thoughts...

too bad nobody wants to be a thinker anymore.

Originally Posted by jfost

interesting thoughts...

too bad nobody wants to be a thinker anymore.

plus, we all stopped giving a shit when it was first made clear in 2004

Originally Posted by Phill

When I was growing up.

I laughed.

Some changes I will set into motion when I become fearless leader:

Offer money to those who want to be sterilized BEFORE they have children

2 child limit per person, NO exceptions

80 percent cut in military spending, use that money to improve domestic infrastructure.

All manufacturers of meth will be exiled to Adak island in the Aluetians.

All other drugs legal

All guns legal without permit. Gun crime= life in prison or death penalty

No tax breaks for churches

Texas will be given back to Mexico

All Boston sports franchises will be dissolved

Fat people will pay triple for health coverage

90 minutes of exercise in school EVERY day

Free college for those who maintain B average or better

States rights will be abolished, All decisions will be made by me and a council of the most intelligent people in the scientific community.

Im sure Ill think of some more stuff after I smoke another bowl.

Wonderful everyone on TGR giving me shit again, just like old times.

But seriously folks.....maybe we need a fearless dictator.

or maybe we just need serious education reform before healthcare reform.

Don't worry its not just America, every democracy in the world has these problems. The swiss just proved their mass ignorance/idiocy the other day.

Originally Posted by crstlextrm

Some changes I will set into motion when I become fearless leader:

Offer money to those who want to be sterilized BEFORE they have children

2 child limit per person, NO exceptions

80 percent cut in military spending, use that money to improve domestic infrastructure.

All manufacturers of meth will be exiled to Adak island in the Aluetians.

All other drugs legal

All guns legal without permit. Gun crime= life in prison or death penalty

No tax breaks for churches

Texas will be given back to Mexico

All Boston sports franchises will be dissolved

Fat people will pay triple for health coverage

90 minutes of exercise in school EVERY day

Free college for those who maintain B average or better

States rights will be abolished, All decisions will be made by me and a council of the most intelligent people in the scientific community.

Im sure Ill think of some more stuff after I smoke another bowl.

I know your post was a joke but there are some very good ideas in there, unfortunately none of them would make it though our "democratic" process.

why don't you save us the trouble and shoot yourself against the wall?

Originally Posted by Phill

Does anybody feel the same way? .

Yeah. I've felt this way for over a decade. The big difference is I've never started some queer thraed about it here. OK so I have started threads about it here. Does that make me homosexual? Or is it all the anonymous sex with multiple male partners?


I think there are two good forms of governance: Benevolent Monarchy and Kill Everybody But Me. And lately I've become disillusioned with Benevolent Monarchy.

Originally Posted by Phill

When I was growing up I always knew that democracy was the only good and just way to run a country. I mean after all, that's the only fair way to do it. Everyone votes, and the country moves along with the whims of the majority. Of course it is impractical to vote on every single decision so we vote on rules and then elect people to carry out day to day decisions within the confines of our those rules. Always seemed like the ultimate system of governance that ran relatively smoothly and efficiently.

Now though, I'm starting to wonder. The more I see of this world, the more I'm starting to realize that the fatal flaw of a democratic government is that democracy gives equal opportunity to both the smart and the stupid. As the US becomes increasingly polarized, I'm noticing more and more the absolute idiocy that is coming forth as legislators, working together in parties, spend their time appealing to the whims of the lowest common denominator. Herd mentality stupidity is driving ridiculous legislation from people who should know better. The best interests of the country are being ignored in favor of perusing what the uninformed, uneducated and often incorrect think are the best interests of the country.

This begs the question, should we let the stupid vote? Should a minimum level of education be required to cast a vote? Are we not obligated to protect the interests of the majority from the interests of the majority? I'm aware of how morally dangerous this slope is, but don't we do it to some extent already? Children are not permitted to make a large number of decisions, including voting in elections, because they don't know better. Or, in other words, they aren't educated enough to be able to chose what is best for them. Children, are all provided with guardians to make decisions in their best interest. Should this right not also be afforded to those who have passed the age of 18 but still might not know any better.

The best example of the success of a non democratic process is our own judicial system. Federal court Judges, while subject to some quasi democratic confirmation process and subject to some political influence due to the nature of presidential appointment, are by and far one of the parts of our government that is least affected by the varying whims of the public. Picked from the cream of the judicial crop so to speak for one of the most sought after jobs in the world, the people who find their way in to the federal court system are some of the smartest and most educated in the country. And with life long appointments the influences of day to day politics begin to fade. Ask any lawyer who has tried a variety of cases before various elected and appointed judges which set of judges are the more competent, I will guarantee you that he or she will probably respond that it is the judges in the district courts. These people, who represent one of the least democratic parts of our government, yet one of the most educated groups in our society, are the people to whom we have entrusted the biggest and most important responsibility that our government has, protecting us.

Does anybody feel the same way? Is democracy intrinsically flawed? Short of a military coup, the impossibility of implicating any kind of change of this magnitude to our government means that this is purely an academic question...

fuck all of you guys.

Originally Posted by Phill

fuck all of you guys.

Hey - I was agreeing with you...

...and wouldn't you like to go to a play or something first?

Originally Posted by Jer

Hey - I was agreeing with you...

...and wouldn't you like to a play or something first?

Shooting range? We can shoot at pictures of blurred, downbound train, tim vwcom and all the other resident morons of PollyAsshat.

Originally Posted by Phill

Shooting range? We can shoot at pictures of blurred, downbound train, tim vwcom and all the other resident morons of PollyAsshat.

Hopefully Jer just shoots you.

Originally Posted by Blurred

Hopefully Jer just shoots you.

I always figured you for the benevolent dictator camp as well.....

Originally Posted by Blurred

Hopefully Jer just shoots you.

Yeah, I guess I've heard it referred to as "shooting" somewhere.

Originally Posted by Phill

When I was growing up I always knew that democracy was the only good and just way to run a country. I mean after all, that's the only fair way to do it. Everyone votes, and the country moves along with the whims of the majority. Of course it is impractical to vote on every single decision so we vote on rules and then elect people to carry out day to day decisions within the confines of our those rules. Always seemed like the ultimate system of governance that ran relatively smoothly and efficiently.

Now though, I'm starting to wonder. The more I see of this world, the more I'm starting to realize that the fatal flaw of a democratic government is that democracy gives equal opportunity to both the smart and the stupid. As the US becomes increasingly polarized, I'm noticing more and more the absolute idiocy that is coming forth as legislators, working together in parties, spend their time appealing to the whims of the lowest common denominator. Herd mentality stupidity is driving ridiculous legislation from people who should know better. The best interests of the country are being ignored in favor of perusing what the uninformed, uneducated and often incorrect think are the best interests of the country.

This begs the question, should we let the stupid vote? Should a minimum level of education be required to cast a vote? Are we not obligated to protect the interests of the majority from the interests of the majority? I'm aware of how morally dangerous this slope is, but don't we do it to some extent already? Children are not permitted to make a large number of decisions, including voting in elections, because they don't know better. Or, in other words, they aren't educated enough to be able to chose what is best for them. Children, are all provided with guardians to make decisions in their best interest. Should this right not also be afforded to those who have passed the age of 18 but still might not know any better.

The best example of the success of a non democratic process is our own judicial system. Federal court Judges, while subject to some quasi democratic confirmation process and subject to some political influence due to the nature of presidential appointment, are by and far one of the parts of our government that is least affected by the varying whims of the public. Picked from the cream of the judicial crop so to speak for one of the most sought after jobs in the world, the people who find their way in to the federal court system are some of the smartest and most educated in the country. And with life long appointments the influences of day to day politics begin to fade. Ask any lawyer who has tried a variety of cases before various elected and appointed judges which set of judges are the more competent, I will guarantee you that he or she will probably respond that it is the judges in the district courts. These people, who represent one of the least democratic parts of our government, yet one of the most educated groups in our society, are the people to whom we have entrusted the biggest and most important responsibility that our government has, protecting us.

Does anybody feel the same way? Is democracy intrinsically flawed? Short of a military coup, the impossibility of implicating any kind of change of this magnitude to our government means that this is purely an academic question...

Ahhh..... good story.

Just one thing. Look up the difference between a Democracy and a Republic.

Democracy = rule by omnipotent majority.

Republic (basically) = a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution, adopted by the people and changeable.

There is a big difference between the two.

I could really blow your mind by suggesting we are a constitutional republic run by the people through a democratic body of representatives elected by plurality -- but it has been awhile (20+ years) since I took an American government class. It would stretch my mind a bit trying to explain all of this and I am not sure I would get all the finer points correct. Basically, it means if we have the right and power to crap where we live, but we gotta' up with the consequences when we do.

But, assuming I understand what your intent was, I have just two questions: 1) who decides who is stupid and who isn't (as per para. 3 in your post), 2) what do propose for a better system -- would you suggest a monarchy, a socialist system, a communal system, anarchy?

Something to think about. Please do not post your manifesto here.

Originally Posted by Phill

Don't worry its not just America, every democracy in the world has these problems. The swiss just proved their mass ignorance/idiocy the other day.

why are the Swiss idiots exactly? for solving a problem that exists throughout Europe before it plagues them?

Originally Posted by wind_dummy

Ahhh..... good story.

Just one thing. Look up the difference between a Democracy and a Republic.

Democracy = rule by omnipotent majority.

Republic (basically) = a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution, adopted by the people and changeable.

There is a big difference between the two.

I could really blow your mind by suggesting we are a constitutional republic run by the people through a democratic body of representatives elected by plurality -- but it has been awhile (20+ years) since I took an American government class. It would stretch my mind a bit trying to explain all of this and I am not sure I would get all the finer points correct.

Not exactly blowing my mind right now. I'm fully aware that we're a constitutional republic rather than a true democracy. A fact you should have gleaned from the first paragraph.

The problem has to do with the strength of the political parties.

But, assuming I understand what your intent was, I have just two questions: 1) who decides who is stupid and who isn't (as per para. 3 in your post), 2) what do propose for a better system -- would you suggest a monarchy, a socialist system, a communal system, anarchy?

I don't know.

Something to think about. Please do not post your manifesto here.

tough

Originally Posted by waxman

why are the Swiss idiots exactly? for solving a problem that exists throughout Europe before it plagues them?

Seriously?

seriously, some people do not play well with others as evidenced by incidents in France/Spain/Denmark/England(but that could be soccer related?)....