Democracy is the worst form of government...

[Bradskii]

No I don't, sir, you've greatly mistaken. I was just telling you that your assumption of the election process being "all fair and over the board" is wrong. Many third countries have biometric voter ID registrition and chain of custory, but not in America. Jan 6 was a symptom, not the cause, and I have to intention to be obsessed over it like many other people.

I don't care if anyone thinks one system happens to be run in a way that they think is not fair. I don't assume that all systems are fair and above board. But that is a different question to which system we should employ, assuming that whichever one it is is fair and above board. So if you think that your system, if it was fair and above board, then let us know.

If you want to argue that it's not fair, then this isn't the thread for it.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

I don't care if anyone thinks one system happens to be run in a way that they think is not fair. I don't assume that all systems are fair and above board. But that is a different question to which system we should employ, assuming that whichever one it is is fair and above board. So if you think that your system, if it was fair and above board, then let us know.

If you want to argue that it's not fair, then this isn't the thread for it.

You asked in the OP how to improve the system, and I gave you a simple answer - secure the election process, make it fair and transparent, then we can move on and talk about other things. And I was not pointing at any other system, I was pointing straight at democratic system, no other system has public election. Maybe this is not an issue in Britain or other countries, but I'm sorry to tell you that it is one in America.

 

[Bradskii]

You asked in the OP how to improve the system, and I gave you a simple answer - secure the election process, make it fair and transparent, then we can move on and talk about other things. And I was not pointing at any other system, I was pointing straight at democratic system, no other system has public election. Maybe this is not an issue in Britain or other countries, but I'm sorry to tell you that it is one in America.

I said 'There must surely be a way to improve the way we decide the major decisions that are needed to be made.' If you think that your system, exactly as you have it, were it to be fair and above board, is the best there is then thanks for that. If you think it could be improved, assuming it were, in the first place, fair and above board, and any changes were likewise fair and above board, then let's hear your thoughts.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

I said 'There must surely be a way to improve the way we decide the major decisions that are needed to be made.' If you think that your system, exactly as you have it, were it to be fair and above board, is the best there is then thanks for that. If you think it could be improved, assuming it were, in the first place, fair and above board, and any changes were likewise fair and above board, then let's hear your thoughts.

There's no such system that is automatically and absolutely "fair and above board", it only exists in Christ's millennial kingdom. Also, as I mentioned, real "major decisions" are often made in agencies, corporations, courtrooms and other major institutions, while congress is often the last to know what's happening. So unfortunately, I don't have my own thoughts on this, my only thought is to pray for God's wisdom, and His spirit will lead you to His thoughts.

 

[Whyayeman]

There's no such system that is automatically and absolutely "fair and above board", it only exists in Christ's millennial kingdom.

'Garbage in, garbage out.' We are not discussing the democratic perfection of Heaven, which is an odd concept to say the least.

How do you think this stuff is contributing to this discussion?

I am puzzled by the insistence that democratic government is irrelevant (which has been implied several times on this thread). The point here is to make democratic government more representative of the people and more relevant to their aspirations. Merely repeating that democracy is faulty or weak is just - well, boring.

If you have anything - anything - constructive to contribute on the issue, please let us have it!

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

'Garbage in, garbage out.' We are not discussing the democratic perfection of Heaven, which is an odd concept to say the least.

How do you think this stuff is contributing to this discussion?

I am puzzled by the insistence that democratic government is irrelevant (which has been implied several times on this thread). The point here is to make democratic government more representative of the people and more relevant to their aspirations. Merely repeating that democracy is faulty or weak is just - well, boring.

If you have anything - anything - constructive to contribute on the issue, please let us have it!

It's irrelevant because I believe in this famous adage by Andrew Breitbart - "politics is downstream from culture, culture is downstream from religion.” America has a bottom up system, political power grows from the grassroot, the influence and authority from the podium is ultimately traced back to the influence and authority from the pulpit. Therefore, when you see a homosexual at the pulpit, when you hear a fake Jesus from the pulpit, don't blame me for rendering democratic government as irrelevant.

 

[Whyayeman]

It's irrelevant because I believe in this famous adage by Andrew Breitbart - "politics is downstream from culture, culture is downstream from religion.” America has a bottom up system, political power grows from the grassroot, the influence and authority from the podium is ultimately traced back to the influence and authority from the pulpit. Therefore, when you see a homosexual at the pulpit, when you hear a fake Jesus from the pulpit, don't blame me for rendering democratic government as irrelevant.

So you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. I can ignore your posts here.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

So you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. I can ignore your posts here.

And I'd rather be ignored than to engage in a theorycraft of another utopia.

 

[partinobodycular]

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947

I've been thinking about this for quite some time (probably a lot more since the Brexit vote). There must surely be a way to improve the way we decide the major decisions that are needed to be made. Surely it's impossible to argue that what we have now is actually the best we can expect. As Winston also said:

'The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter'.

Somebody please cheer me up and tell me we can expect something better.

If the following viewpoint has any merit at all then the solution would seem rather obvious... we need a new religion.

It's irrelevant because I believe in this famous adage by Andrew Breitbart - "politics is downstream from culture, culture is downstream from religion.” America has a bottom up system, political power grows from the grassroot, the influence and authority from the podium is ultimately traced back to the influence and authority from the pulpit.

 

[Whyayeman]

If the following viewpoint has any merit at all then the solution would seem rather obvious... we need a new religion.

It hasn't.

(We have enough religions to go round already. Please don't encourage them!)

 

[Bradskii]

If the following viewpoint has any merit at all then the solution would seem rather obvious... we need a new religion.

The question that I thought was too obvious to ask would have been 'Which religion?' With a natural follow up when the answer was given 'Well, which version of it?'

 

[stevevw]

I think its really about money. From what I understand behind the polititians is powerful wealthy entities and behind this is an even smaller powerful number of very wealthy entities that control things. This can only happen in a democratic and liberal society. Money by power and influence.

Todays political parties are beholden to too many other influences even opposing ones to stay in power. They are not beholden to the people, the average Joe blow. Political donations, vested interests, deals/sweatners made behind doors.

So maybe take the money out of it. That should level the playing field. No donations and no associations. Just polititians without being influenced by anyone arguing their case based on good policy for the nation and for the people. Stripped of all the trappings. Maybe even have the average Joe blow have a say in the same arguements.

I know a lot of polititians here in Australia are professional pollies. They usually have little life experience in business or doing it hard. So they are out of touch. Maybe get some uneducated polititians with some common sense who can represent us. I know the people are ready for someone who speaks it like it is rather than spin yarns about doing the right thing.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

The question that I thought was too obvious to ask would have been 'Which religion?' With a natural follow up when the answer was given 'Well, which version of it?'

Messianic, most biblical version in my knowledge.

 

[Bradskii]

Messianic, most biblical version in my knowledge.

So we can add a theocracy to the list of proposed systems. Run by the approximately 200,000 members in the US.

 

[partinobodycular]

The question that I thought was too obvious to ask would have been 'Which religion?'

I think that we should start from scratch. I have a couple of ideas.

This religion shall make no claims about the Divine, leaving such questions up to the discretion of the individual as they see fit. Hence this religion shall claim no authority beyond that which we the people choose to give it, guided and established by the understanding that... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."... and that we the people shall make no laws to usurp these rights, but only to ensure the equitable application thereof.

That should get us started. Feel free to add to, or edit this mission statement as you feel inclined.

 

[Bradskii]

I think that we should start from scratch. I have a couple of ideas.

This religion shall make no claims about the Divine, leaving such questions up to the discretion of the individual as they see fit. Hence this religion shall claim no authority beyond that which we the people choose to give it, guided and established by the understanding that... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."... and that we the people shall make no laws to usurp these rights, but only to ensure the equitable application thereof.

That should get us started. Feel free to add to, or edit this mission statement as you feel inclined.

I'd include women as well. But it was of the times.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

So we can add a theocracy to the list of proposed systems. Run by the approximately 200,000 members in the US.

I’ve told you many times that a system doesn’t work by itself. It all depends on the people that run it. Several Latin American and subsahara African countries had copied the American constitution and three branches, but none of them worked, because they didn’t have a “religious and moral people”.

 

[Occams Barber]

I think that we should start from scratch. I have a couple of ideas.

This religion shall make no claims about the Divine, leaving such questions up to the discretion of the individual as they see fit. Hence this religion shall claim no authority beyond that which we the people choose to give it, guided and established by the understanding that... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."... and that we the people shall make no laws to usurp these rights, but only to ensure the equitable application thereof.

That should get us started. Feel free to add to, or edit this mission statement as you feel inclined.

This is good as far as it goes despite the fact that there is nothing self-evident about 'these truths' - ya gotta start somewhere.

What is seriously missing is 'responsibilities'. In the absence of a statement covering the individual's responsibility for maintaining the life, liberty and happiness of his/her fellow citizens then the statement is a little one-sided. A government and society working for the public good will, hopefully, emphasise a balance between individual rights and collective responsibilities.

To go back to the OP - is it possible that a certain troubled democracy (which shall be nameless) could be less troubled if its founding principles included this balance instead of an (arguably) self-centred focus on individual rights?

(Pause here momentarily while OB slips into a bulletproof vest with matching flak helmet.)

OB

 

[partinobodycular]

What is seriously missing is 'responsibilities'. In the absence of a statement covering the individual's responsibility for maintaining the life, liberty and happiness of his/her fellow citizens then the statement is a little one-sided. A government and society working for the public good will, hopefully, emphasise a balance between individual rights and collective responsibilities.

I wholeheartedly agree, every religion should have its 'words of wisdom', its 'golden rule', and its 'love thy neighbor'. In fact I have no problem with borrowing a few sage passages from a religious text or two. It's not like we've suddenly invented the concept. The goal isn't to lessen the importance of other religions, but rather to emphasize the universality of them. In fact I wouldn't even mind a few 'thou shalt nots' thrown in for good measure. Teach them in school if you like. Post them in the town hall square. Let it be known that me and my house fulfill the commandment to 'love thy God' by loving and serving others. Not because we have to, but because we choose to.

This new religion isn't about divine edicts, it's about a social conscience. It's about recognizing the inherent and immeasurable value of 'we the people". Which we choose to embrace, not because we'll suffer unspeakable horror if we don't, but because we... in what little divinity we possess... recognize that the commandment to love thy neighbor isn't something that will some day be rewarded... it is the reward.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

I think its really about money. From what I understand behind the polititians is powerful wealthy entities and behind this is an even smaller powerful number of very wealthy entities that control things. This can only happen in a democratic and liberal society. Money by power and influence.

Todays political parties are beholden to too many other influences even opposing ones to stay in power. They are not beholden to the people, the average Joe blow. Political donations, vested interests, deals/sweatners made behind doors.

So maybe take the money out of it. That should level the playing field. No donations and no associations. Just polititians without being influenced by anyone arguing their case based on good policy for the nation and for the people. Stripped of all the trappings. Maybe even have the average Joe blow have a say in the same arguements.

I know a lot of polititians here in Australia are professional pollies. They usually have little life experience in business or doing it hard. So they are out of touch. Maybe get some uneducated polititians with some common sense who can represent us. I know the people are ready for someone who speaks it like it is rather than spin yarns about doing the right thing.

Yeah, cue the norotrious revolving door of Washington, from corporation executives to government official to K street lobbyist.