Democracy is the worst form of government...

[Whyayeman]

You are the one who said there are only 2 choices. Totalitarianism or democracy.

Broadly speaking government falls into those categories. I can think of variants, but that is what it comes down to. If you prefer, substitute 'tyranny' for 'totalitarianism'.

I agree that all governments make laws the populace must accept. There is nothing controversial in that as I can see.

 

[Whyayeman]

My point is that there is no such thing as a state offers absolute freedom

Well then, we are in agreement.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Broadly speaking government falls into those categories. I can think of variants, but that is what it comes down to. If you prefer, substitute 'tyranny' for 'totalitarianism'.

I agree that all governments make laws the populace must accept. There is nothing controversial in that as I can see.

Broadly speaking they don't fall into those categories. All governments form into various levels of control but they all control to a certain extent.

Democracies aren't immune to being tyrannical and can by their very nature excercise tyranny that limits freedom on the basis of it's own creed. There are more laws and regulations in democratic societies over people than there were over people in the middle ages. Democracies also brook far less dissent.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Well then, we are in agragreement

Except we're not. You seem to think democracy is all about freedom, it isn't.

 

[Bradskii]

Uh, no. Compulsion is compulsion, period. My point is that there is no such thing as a state offers absolute freedom and to say there is either only totalitarianism or democracy is on the face of it absurd. Democratic states can be just as totalitarian as any dictatorship. They aren't special.

I agree. But I think that it's generally accepted that a democratic state is one where the people can, if they so choose, vote to remove the government. That wouldn't be the case in a totalitarian state.

That said, there is an argument that a totalitarian state that everyone thinks is good for the country could be better than a democratic one where it wasn't. The problem there would be changing the totalitarian government if it all went pear shaped.

This was touched on earlier when the pros and conns of a 'benevolent dictator' were discussed.

 

[Bradskii]

Except we're not. You seem to think democracy is all about freedom, it isn't.

It's only the freedom to vote out those in power. Notwithstanding that some democratic governments are more laissez faire that others so one might allow more freedom than the other. But we're not really discussing party politics here.

 

[Whyayeman]

The question 'how difficult is it to remove the government from power?' was a test applied by Tony Benn, a British MP to offer a measure of how strong democracy is an any state.

For the countries we live in - UK, Australia and New Zealand - the answer is straightforward. We hold regular and frequent elections and the majority in a fairly contested poll form a government for a while. Apply the test to Russia, China, North Korea, Myanmar, Cuba and numerous other states and the answers are very different.

Now, something I hope will cheer up Bradskii: there is a lot of 'Brexit regret' in the UK. Even hardline Brexiteers are admitting that it has been a failure. There are excuses, of course. For some, including the awful Farage, the fault lies with how badly it was done. Meanwhile, among the population there is a growing understanding that they were conned, lied to, given false promises. They feel tricked into supporting an ideology that they do not share. Others expected all foreigners to be sent 'back home', which of course did not hapen. The xenophobes believed that it would put a stop to immigration, which of course it didn't.

If the same question was put in a referendum the answer would be a decisive 'No', if recent opinion polls are to be believed. (I was a Remainer and now I am a Returner.)

 

[Bradskii]

The question 'how difficult is it to remove the government from power?' was a test applied by Tony Benn, a British MP to offer a measure of how strong democracy is an any state.

For the countries we live in - UK, Australia and New Zealand - the answer is straightforward. We hold regular and frequent elections and the majority in a fairly contested poll form a government for a while. Apply the test to Russia, China, North Korea, Myanmar, Cuba and numerous other states and the answers are very different.

Now, something I hope will cheer up Bradskii: there is a lot of 'Brexit regret' in the UK. Even hardline Brexiteers are admitting that it has been a failure. There are excuses, of course. For some, including the awful Farage, the fault lies with how badly it was done. Meanwhile, among the population there is a growing understanding that they were conned, lied to, given false promises. They feel tricked into supporting an ideology that they do not share. Others expected all foreigners to be sent 'back home', which of course did not hapen. The xenophobes believed that it would put a stop to immigration, which of course it didn't.

If the same question was put in a referendum the answer would be a decisive 'No', if recent opinion polls are to be believed. (I was a Remainer and now I am a Returner.)

I completely agree with what you said on Brexit. I was in London on the day of the vote and when I woke up the following morning and switched on the TV I was as shocked as I could have ever been. What I have been reading recently about the change in opinion in the UK prompted me thinking about this thread.

And actually, the fact that there is so much regret doesn't cheer me up. It just makes me angrier that people couldn't see back then what they have come to realise now.

 

[Whyayeman]

the fact that there is so much regret doesn't cheer me up.

Nor me. Beware referendums!

I rather envy your voting system of proportional representation. What we have got is utterly discredited here.

 

[Bradskii]

Nor me. Beware referendums!

I rather envy your voting system of proportional representation. What we have got is utterly discredited here.

I'm still inwardly debating the compulsory voting aspect. I could easily argue for and against. I guess that both are considerations for the type of system that might improve things. Democracy plus proportional representation as opposed to first past the post and a democratic system with/without compulsory voting.

 

[timewerx]

'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.

We don't exactly live in a democracy.....

Notice our choice of candidates. They all sound the same, talk the same, comes from the same schools. Manipulable, controllable, similar agendas, same outcomes when they get elected.

They all come from the same mold. Even mass media plays out to promote them but not the "outliers".

The few who turned out different ends up killed.

It's only democracy on paper but inside is nothing but decay and rot. Countries who maybe experiencing "true" democracy tends to be violent and coups d'etats and civil wars common like in small, poor countries where CIA sometimes gets involved in their politics so who goes to say they may not be experiencing true democracy either.

What gives? I think we simply live in a world where the way things work promotes evil men and women hungry for blood and power no matter what form of government or economic system.

 

[Bradskii]

We don't exactly live in a democracy.....

Notice our choice of candidates.

Well, it's a democratic process to elect one of them. But you're right - the choice can leave a lot to be desired (I'm looking at at you, America!).

 

[timewerx]

Well, it's a democratic process to elect one of them. But you're right - the choice can leave a lot to be desired (I'm looking at at you, America!).

Unfortunately, many countries have tried make a template out of USA's democratic system.

 

[rjs330]

Literacy tests? Do Republicans really want to wed themselves to that legacy? The only time that's been used in the US was during the era of Jim Crow, when southern oligarchs and politicians used legal and illegal means to suppress African American votes.

It's not a literacy test. It's a civics test. I understand why he's suggesting it. It's because so many people have no clue about the Constitution or how the government operates. They are the folks who believe the government should support all their needs and desires. That the governments purpose is to be a big cash cow for them.

He's trying to weed out the totally ignorant. I get the point, but I don't think it's the right move.

 

[rjs330]

I know where I'd prefer to live.

Until the dictator turned on you and decided only his family and cronies deserved to have everything and everyone else lived to serve them and their needs. Everyone else could wear gray clothes and live in a hovel. You'd care then. The difference would be the only way to get rid of him would be to commit treason and overthrow the government.

At least in a democratic/republic type of government you would just be able to vote them out.

 

[rjs330]

Well, it's a democratic process to elect one of them. But you're right - the choice can leave a lot to be desired (I'm looking at at you, America!).

I can't say I disagree with you, particularly in the last few elections.

But Are you trying to tell me the Aussies always have the best candidates and never have to vote between a couple of bad choices?

Why only look at America,,,?

 

[rjs330]

A close second. Well, not that close.

I wouldn't at all want to sit with Obama. He always came across as better than everyone else. He looked down on everyone. I wouldn't want to sit down with Trump either. If there were guys I'd sit with at a pub it'd be Bush Jr., Clinton, Reagan and JFK.

 

[Whyayeman]

... we simply live in a world where the way things work promotes evil men and women ...

Certainly dictatorships tend to favour the wicked and the ruthless. And they are difficult to overthrow, though it does happen from time to time. France rid itself of a tyrannical regime. Russia got rid of the Romanovs, even though it has not turned out very well so far.

Can the way things work in a democracy be improved? I do not think restricting the franchise by any kind of selection process is the way to do it. I do think that electorates need to be well educated. That is where I think democracies should start.

 

[timewerx]

I do think that electorates need to be well educated.

True but do most of them have to come from the Ivy Leagues or highly privileged backgrounds?

The problem with such leaders is they wouldn't know the needs of the under privileged, the poor, the weak, and the oppressed. To ignore the voice of the least, you are encouraging social inequality / injustice. These leads to crime, poverty, mass shootings, etc.

You can't understand oppression, poverty, and utter hopelessness, unless you have lived such life for a long time, well into adulthood. Horrible misfortunes after another. But instead, our choices are always from the opposite end. Those who came from highly privileged backgrounds who can only understand and serve the richest few.

 

[Whyayeman]

True but do most of them have to come from the Ivy Leagues or highly privileged backgrounds?

The problem with such leaders is they wouldn't know the needs of the under privileged, the poor, the weak, and the oppressed. To ignore the voice of the least, you are encouraging social inequality / injustice. These leads to crime, poverty, mass shootings, etc.

You can't understand oppression, poverty, and utter hopelessness, unless you have lived such life for a long time, well into adulthood. Horrible misfortunes after another. But instead, our choices are always from the opposite end. Those who came from highly privileged backgrounds who can only understand and serve the richest few.

I don't mean the candidates for office.

The electorate - the people who vote - need a good education. There is a discussion to be had in what constitutes a good education in a democracy. I would argue for a liberal education; that is an education which tends towards teaching people how to think rather than what to think.

I am not arguing for voting qualifications. In a democracy there must be universal suffrage. There should be no qualification beyond being of age so I am for a good liberal education for everybody.