Forms of Government/Political Parties

[Doom Shepherd]

Benevolent Consulted Tyranny with a Meritocratic succession selection process.

 

So basically, you have a sort of liberal libertarian dictator, with a handpicked cabinet of expert advisers (or a pool of them to call upon), and his successor is chosen and trained well in advance, by a merit-based system.

 

Never going to work - will turn into a closed oligarchy and end up in tears and blood, just like any other dictatorship.

 

Nah. Some oligarchies are better than others. and at least a meritocracy is more likely to be inclusive than, say, an oligarchy made up of the super-wealthy, the generationally political, and damn lawyers, like we have now.

 

If our Democracy is doomed, this is why:

'The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction.... It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens.

 

What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’

 

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome.'

 

We made the fatal wound a long time ago. It's a slow bleed, but it we really started to hit the 'Bread and Circuses' tipping point about a half-century ago.

[Vapymid]

What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.

 

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure.

 

On the face of it it is a problem.

 

However, in our democracies people don't actually get to vote on anything other than who will represent them in the government and the legislature, with the exception of really major issues for which referendums are called, and very rarely at that.

 

The actual running of the countries involved is then done by their respective executive and law-making organs. If anything, such system is vulnerable not to the incompetence of regular "hoi poloi" voters but to powerful groups who influence the acting of the government in their own self-interest and *outside* any democratic process - hello, lobbyists!

 

And democracy is the only thing that can at least moderate that problem - by replacing overfed and lazy crooks with new hungry ones...

 

Regards

[Doublenature]

Here is my idea: we have capitalism mixed with communism. We still have different salaries, open market etc. BUT all public transport is owned by the state and is therefore free. Companies owned by the state, example: here in sweden we have a store that sells all alcohol (except for light-beer) and its owned by the state. (they have stores all over the country). Now this also means that there cant be any other stores selling liqour. Just a thought.

[Twilight Sparkle]

Frankly, the only problem with Monopolies is that they can essentially do whatever they want if they are the only provider of a certain product. However, if a monopoly actually held itself to a standard equal to modern day corporations that are forced to do so by reason of competition, then a monopoly would be totally okay with me. I'd be just fine with driving a Chevy if Chevy is the only car company in the world, so long as it makes GOOD vehicles. If a state-owned monopoly does just as well as privately-owned corporations, then I see no problem whatsoever with them.

[Doom Shepherd]

What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.

 

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure.

 

On the face of it it is a problem.

 

However, in our democracies people don't actually get to vote on anything other than who will represent them in the government and the legislature,

 

And the people who win those votes tend to be the ones who promise the most bread and circuses for their followers, and the ones who deliver on those promises are the ones that get re-elected over and over.

[Doom Shepherd]

Here is my idea: we have capitalism mixed with communism. We still have different salaries, open market etc. BUT all public transport is owned by the state and is therefore free. Companies owned by the state, example: here in sweden we have a store that sells all alcohol (except for light-beer) and its owned by the state. (they have stores all over the country). Now this also means that there cant be any other stores selling liqour. Just a thought.

 

What if the state suddenly decides that to save money, their stores will no longer stock [uncommon brand that only you and a small segment of the population really really likes]?

 

The thing about state-owned monopolies (on anything from liquor to health care) is: If they SUCK, where else are you going to go?

 

If Company A does me a disservice, I can always say "frag off," and switch to company B,C,or D. That's the free market for you.

 

If my nation's government holds a monololy on a service, and decides to adopt a policy that screws me over... I either have to try to elect a new government (and PRAY that it will reverse the policy), or move to another country. Neither choice is exactly easy.

[Doublenature]

Here is my idea: we have capitalism mixed with communism. We still have different salaries, open market etc. BUT all public transport is owned by the state and is therefore free. Companies owned by the state, example: here in sweden we have a store that sells all alcohol (except for light-beer) and its owned by the state. (they have stores all over the country). Now this also means that there cant be any other stores selling liqour. Just a thought.

 

What if the state suddenly decides that to save money, their stores will no longer stock [uncommon brand that only you and a small segment of the population really really likes]?

 

The thing about state-owned monopolies (on anything from liquor to health care) is: If they SUCK, where else are you going to go?

 

If Company A does me a disservice, I can always say "frag off," and switch to company B,C,or D. That's the free market for you.

 

Well then, say we have a free market with a government owned company? Like there is Wal-mart, best buy and something the government owns.

 

If my nation's government holds a monololy on a service, and decides to adopt a policy that screws me over... I either have to try to elect a new government (and PRAY that it will reverse the policy), or move to another country. Neither choice is exactly easy.

[Vapymid]

And the people who win those votes tend to be the ones who promise the most bread and circuses for their followers, and the ones who deliver on those promises are the ones that get re-elected over and over.

 

Oh, yes. Until the economy goes down the drain and they run out of money to spend. Then, quickly, there are more people disgruntled with the government than those who still expect them to provide bread and entertainment and the government is changed. Simple negative feed-back - but for this to work you must have a mechanism, which is democracy. The UK is a case in point here - the Labour government was milking the country to cultivate a specific group of voters which held them in power for 13 years, then they run out of money and got kicked out.

 

Alternatively, where the feed-back is not working - as in a tyranny, the dissent grows and the economic disbalances accumulate until the system breaks down and a coup or a revolution follows. History if full of clear examples of how that happens.

 

Regards

[Doom Shepherd]

And the people who win those votes tend to be the ones who promise the most bread and circuses for their followers, and the ones who deliver on those promises are the ones that get re-elected over and over.

 

Oh, yes. Until the economy goes down the drain and they run out of money to spend. Then, quickly, there are more people disgruntled with the government than those who still expect them to provide bread and entertainment and the government is changed. Simple negative feed-back - but for this to work you must have a mechanism, which is democracy. The UK is a case in point here - the Labour government was milking the country to cultivate a specific group of voters which held them in power for 13 years, then they run out of money and got kicked out.

 

Alternatively, where the feed-back is not working - as in a tyranny, the dissent grows and the economic disbalances accumulate until the system breaks down and a coup or a revolution follows. History if full of clear examples of how that happens.

 

Regards

 

Pretty sure the Greeks would be shocked to discover than they're not a Democracy...

[Doom Shepherd]

Well then, say we have a free market with a government owned company? Like there is Wal-mart, best buy and something the government owns.

 

So, UPS, FedEx, and the Post Office. You can see for yourself how that's working out.

[Michael Archer]

I voted "Other" for a very strong Constitutional Republic government. The only power the majority has in such a system is electing certain officials to extremely limited positions of power. The majority never, ever, has the power to vote away a man's rights.

 

I can't believe how many people on this thread, and smart people presumably, are defending democracy! Democracy can be just as bad as a dictatorship. Do you know why Socrates was executed? Not because he was breaking the law or anything, not because the court had empirical evidence to prove that he was breaking the law, not because he was actually violating peoples rights, but because Democratic Ancient Greece voted on it.

 

That's the evil of democracy. Democracy means majority rule; it means that might makes right. To illustrate this, black people in the post-civil war South were the minority while the KKK was the majority. Democracy says that it's ok for the KKK to lynch a black man, since he's the minority and they're the majority.

 

A proper government is bound by a strong constitution and is implemented solely to protect rights. Simply put: the government is a representative of the people which only uses force in retaliation; if you don't have the right to initiate force on someone or mug them on the street, then you can't give the government authority to do that.

[Vapymid]

That's the evil of democracy. Democracy means majority rule; it means that might makes right.

 

Actually, one of the most common complaints I heard about democracy is that it means the rule of vocal minorities...

 

Anyway, you are right when you are saying that a democracy *can* be as bad as a dictatorship but still, on the balance, a form of democracy is preferable than a dictatorship (save maybe in the event of a natural disaster or war).

 

Further than that, one must specify in much greater detail which type of democracy he/she is discussing, otherwise the argument becomes very muddled.

 

Regards

[Pinkie Pie]

Until one finds the 'ultimate' form of government with no flaws (which is prettymuch impossible) you have to go with what works best and so far democracy seems to be working pretty okay.

[BTGBullseye]

So far as I can tell, everybody seems to think that the USA is a democracy... It isn't. It is a democratic republic. That means we vote in the people who vote in the people who run the country.

[Michael Archer]

Just when I thought that BTGBullseye was going to say something I completely agreed with, he wrote the rest of that sentence. Wikipedia says that USA is a "Federal Presidential Constitutional Republic". It's not a democracy in any stretch of the word. It has always intended to be a republic, but some people are trying to change that. The word "democracy" never appears in the constitution--and the constitution even explicitly says that it's a "Republican form of government". James Madison warned about the evil of democracy.

 

I think a lot of people bash the Constitutional Republican form of government because the United States is the quintessential example, and they're not doing that well. The problem is not with the actual system--it's with the Constitution. It's a very fractured and incomplete document. The Father's were geniuses who were aware of the danger of democracy and unlimited government, but they forgot to account for everything and figured a lot of other stuff was self-explanatory.

[Vapymid]

Wikipedia says that USA is a "Federal Presidential Constitutional Republic". It's not a democracy in any stretch of the word.

 

Republic means that the head of state and/or the government is elected, directly or indirectly. And in the US the President and the representative organs are elected by popular choice - which means democracy. The popular choice may be filtered or distorted in the process of its expression by people but on the whole it is traceable from ballot box to the office. So the US is a democracy and stop imagining otherwise.

 

Now, there are many forms of democracy and the one most people are hung up about is the "direct democracy", where each decision is supposed to be made by popular vote. I am not aware of any country which operates purely that way. The closest is, probably, Switzerland and they are doing OK last time I checked.

 

Regards

[Michael Archer]

You're right Vampymid: America is a democracy. That's why American school children, every morning, pledge allegiance to the flag and to the democracy for which it stands. That's why Article IV, Section IV of America's constitution explicit says it's a democratic form of government and not a republican one. That's why when the Union Army marched against the traitors to the South in 1861, they sang the "Battle Hymn of the Democracy."

 

Also, this is me, apparently, but I wouldn't read too much into it, since it says I'm a libertarian. (I'm clearly not):

 

[Pinkie Pie]

American school children, every morning, pledge allegiance to the flag and to the democracy for which it stands.

Part of the reason I'm glad I'm not in public school. I hated doing it then because I thought it was dumb and I didn't feel very much loyalty to the country, anyway. Now I'm really glad because I've realized America is really fucking stupid.

[Alyxx Thorne]

There're stupid people everywhere. America just tends to put them in powerful positions.

[Vapymid]

it says I'm a libertarian. (I'm clearly not)

 

That would be a helluva understatement!

 

Regards