Is Democracy Really Worth it?

[VinceSov]

Well, is it? What has happened in the democratic systems of the world has been the development of populism and the rise of a breed of politicians who care much more about power than about actually doing anything for the people. This is all because of the fact that they are elected by the populace at large, and so their top priority is always to re-elect themselves. The rise of the ethos of populism is defeating democracy's point, and the only way democracy can work is total democracy or not at all.

In a real democracy, there should be no need for spin-doctors. On the other hand, a look at the enlightened despotic regimes of the late 18th century show that these regimes actually got quite a lot done. At the moment what do we have? We have politicians that only hold power for self-perpetuating purposes, tending towards more a totalitarian than a democracy society. On the other hand, enlightened despotism provides means for free speech and an efficient legislative system at the same time.

Democracy at the moment is also encouraging bureaucracy and people aren't ruling at all - in fact, the only thing people do is submit to the commands of the political structure. Wouldn't an absolutist - but benevolent - regime be better and more efficient?

 

[Spartan Erik]

Ah nice intellectual question; however seeing as how I just woke up and my brain is still turning on its cognitive ability, I'll just state that not all places are meant for democracy. There is a natural built in bureaucracy when it comes to democracy; and of course making promises that aren't kept is key to re-election. I imagine the only time you will have a true democracy in that sense is to inform EVERYONE to vote, or rather make it a law to vote and allow days off work so they can go to polling places like they do in European countries.

Problem is that any other form of government can have it's power abused likewise; it's a choice between the lesser of two devils I believe

 

[VinceSov]

Well I think a "true" democacy would be a totally direct democracy, where there is no election, but everyone takes part in a pan-national legislature. That obviously presents great technical difficulties, but it would be the only true democracy in my opinion.

 

[reichiru]

Democracy is the only way of government most countries know though. I mean, do you really want to be communist? Or ruled by some hyperactive dictator? There are both pros and cons to this, it really depends on how you think about it. Elections are really stupid though, in my opinion. They should really consider more about what they are agreeing to before they actually make the promises. Those government creeps only go through with them... not even half the time.

 

[GamingX]

Democracy as defined by a famous person is a government for the people, by the people and to the people. Though, as VinceSov pointed out it is leading to a breed of politicians greedy for power and indulging in dirty politics. It is also leading to high rates of corruption. Staying in the world's largest democracy, I've seen it all. But as StarShine pointed out it is an option between the lesser devil and the greater devil.

 

[flinx]

Wouldn't an absolutist - but benevolent - regime be better and more efficient?

Absolutely! But only if I am the boss! :naughty:

 

[malfist]

The current state of democracy in the USA is in shambles. If it's for the people, why is Bush so hated? Why is he still in office? How can he think that he has the right to veto something that represents the majority, just not enough to override the veto. This isn't democracy, it may be, but it's warped.

 

[flinx]

It's democracy, because the majority voted him. And next year you can vote someone else.
If it was a dictatorship, you'd be stuck with him for life! :eek4:

 

[intheclutch]

The current state of democracy in the USA is in shambles. If it's for the people, why is Bush so hated? Why is he still in office? How can he think that he has the right to veto something that represents the majority, just not enough to override the veto. This isn't democracy, it may be, but it's warped.

He can, because it's part of the Constitution. So, he thinks he has the right...because he actually does. That's how it's been since 1783.

Is it time for a change in the Constitution? Probably. Will it happen? Doubtful. No one who is in office is going to change to something that would lessen their power, and certainly no one will change to something that takes them out.

 

[malfist]

That's true, he does have the right by the constitution, but I wasn't talking about the constitution, I was talking about democracy. Not what we have here in America, a true, representative democracy, still wouldn't look like this.

Ofcourse, the contesting view to democracy is usually communism, and I say I love communism, just the same as that one guy (Voltare?) loved christ, he just hated his followers. Communism would be great, if it actually worked, but it won't with human nature. I believe that is a similar problem this kind of democracy encounters too.

 

[lambada]

Interesting question... and seeing as I don't know where I stand on the pro democracy line, i'll just point you towards Plato.

His interesting view of Democracy is that it is, due to it's very nature corrupt as you have to give stupid people the vote and they are influenced by the 'evil' leaders (yes... that's a simplification but I really don't want to flick though my copy of the republic again). He'd much rather have a dictatorship by a true philosopher. This itself raises some questions... Is a benevolent dictatorship really better than Democracy?.


Form some more information pick up a copy of The Republic, I'll add a link to an essay of mine discussing Platos reasons for this if someone says their interested.

 

[malfist]

I don't think Plato ever calls them 'evil' leaders, just that they are not enlightened and therefor not just. There are problems with Plato though, if you read the entire Republic, especially with the Cave. Sad thing is, that even in my Honor's Rhetoric, people couldn't understand that it was an allegory, not an absolute representation. When we paired what Plato said about education and where they would be in the cave, a lot couldn't understand how the people can leave and return. How are you supposed to make a guardian go back to the 'Cave.' They didn't realize that it was all a metaphor.

 

[Dazz]

In a word No lol, lets face it there is no way 1 person can be entrusted with the welfare of an entire nation. As previous posters have pointed out they will tell lies and con you into voting for them with all the promises in the world and then turn around and let everyone down. Not that communism works either mind LOL whats the saying 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly' which is in essence absolutly (lol) right.

IMO the only system that could ever work is self-govering where every matter is put to the vote of everybody who can vote (made even more possible with growing access to the internet) this would then be managed by say a panel of 12 voted in (or at random), on a fortnightly basis simular to a jury as to minimise the chances of corruption.

But who am I to say what works and does'nt, Im just one man at his PC typing stuff and musing over the net but if you ever see a 'vote for Dazz' poster, you know where to put your X

 

[mr kennedy]

Democracy? It's important in times but when it gets abused, IMHO, that's the time it should be removed... Democracy is all about the people (ah, the people) making their voices count. But lets take an election for example... Politicians pay people up to vote for them.... that is NOT democracy anymore.... This happens particularly in my home country... where poverty covers majority of the population... if you are offered a price for your vote, can you really resist it if you have nothing to feed your family?

 

[cointoss]

You must admit EVERY government system has the ability to be abused. In fact, as system is said to be abused by different people at different times. Afterall, a person receiving benefit from the abuse will likely see it as abuse. I feel a democracy is the best form of government because we can make changes as we see fit.

Yes, I agree that a government that polls its citizens about every issue would be a more democratic society. However, this would take huge amounts of time, because decisions must be made every day. Not just on the federal level. The state, city, county, and locality. Yet and still, there is room for corruption by the vote counters. Finally, even under such a system, a portion of the population would still be unhappy and unserviced by the government, because democracies by their very nature serve the majority.

 

[whitebus]

At least democracies come with their own tool for the removal of a tyrant... i.e. the next election.

Caesar and Napolean both managed to get themselves elected emperor for life, but then that's democracy too i guess. Every rule needs an exception.

Obviously, direct democracy would seem to be the most preferred, but its success relies heavily on two things... the education/engagement level of the populace and the oversight of sober second thought. The most important underlying theory of a working democracy is that a truly free and democratic society will always make the right decision if truth is known. When it cannot be known, the incorrect decision will make it evident. Therefore, the ability to change course becomes paramount.

 

[warlordste]

as in any type democracy has it gd and bad point i think it is but every one opion it different on this

 

[ryoko126]

Both Communism and Democracy are both good ideas in theory, but as was said, they can't work due to human nature.

Communism was originally supposed to be the idea that everyone worked equally and got payed equally. But things seem to get so messed up that it is how it is in the communist countries. I'm not saying it's good or bad. That's up to other's perspectives.

Democracy is based on equal rights for all. But we still have the heirarcies and chains of power, meaning that this is not the turnout at all. People in power will normally trample over whoever they can to keep that power and wealth. That's why I don't like the republicans. They're ideas only help the rich, even if they are better at some things than the democratics.

 

[alcramer]

I don't think "democracy" and "communism" are really oppositional. What people in US and Europe call democracy comes out of 18th century thinking, and has mainly to do with power relations (individuals, the state, all that stuff). Communism is an early 20th century deal that emerged from the socialist movements, which were focused on economic relations (how can I feed my kids?). Our job in the 21st century is to muck arround with all these old ideas & come up with a new paradigm that actually works. I like the idea of "human rights". That seems to work across all cultures. To me it means 1. you get to vote on your leaders; 2. your kids get educated for free; 3. you can see a doctor if you're sick, even if you have no money.

 

[cointoss]

Ooops. In my earlier post I meant to say:

"Afterall, a person receiving benefit from the abuse will likely NOT see it as abuse."

I agree with alcramer on his idea of human rights. I would also like to point out that the USA is a work in progress. In the beginning we believed all men were created equal, which was odd because we had slaves and women had no rights... But you have to admit we have come a long way.

I realize there are a lot of reasons to think the USA is failing us. The war for one. I admit, I thought it was a mistake from the beginning. There has seldom been a war that we as a people could support for very long, what with all the deaths. I don't think we should have gone from the beginning, I never did. But now that we have, and now that we have removed the powers that be in the country, we can't just leave. We made a mess, we have to fix it. I mean, maybe you don't like Saddam Hussein. I didn't know him. But, with all his faults, he was leading the country, you know. You can't kill him and then leave, what does the country do? They kill each other until someone regains control. Sure that is what they are doing now, but at least our presence reduces the amount of the slaughter.