Is representative government valuable, or only valuable for the things it provides?

[CrONoS]

Technocracy:
We become more and more a technocracy.

Civil servants take more and more decision.

The problem with technocracy is it will lead into a dictatorship, where the rationale efficiency will be placed higher than will of people. Technocracy is the denial of the human difference of opinion and the conflict inherent to the life in society by placing a "rationale goal" over the will of peole. Rationality, can take various form; for best or for worse.

For a good book about politics and various political system;
In defense of Politics - Bernard Crick

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226120678/103-3562945-1644638?v=glance&n=283155

[BlackCat]

Re: Is representative government valuable, or only valuable for the things it provide

Originally posted by Vesayen
Do you think representative government is valuable, or only so valuable as the things it tends to provide?

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, combined with the fact that I think i've come to the conclusion the entire political process in the united states is either fraudulent or unrepresentative of the will of the people, or the voters, or all of the above.

Just in case this thread get Vesayen'ed.

@Lorizael : that of course is a solution, but how do you figure out wich should be executed ? I of course assume that all are in favor of meritocraticty but differ in wish kind is the true path.

[:) Smiley]

Representative government is the most entertaining. When Taiwan became democratic, it added a whole new holiday season and dozens of new TV and radio call-in talk show.









more:

http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/election/election.html

http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/election/photgall/phot.htm

[Seeker]

I like the Consular system of the Early Republic in Rome, two elected executives who balance each other out.

On the other hand, people get the "government that they deserve".

The system of government does not actually matter as much as the culture of the nation.

You can have the most enlightened consitution imaginable and if you have a population that is willfully, proudly ignorant, easily manipulated, musheaded, "apolitical", or desperate and totally disillusioned then you are going to get an oligarchy.

By the same token, a population that is intellectually engaged, "political" in the Periclean sense (in that they care about politics as being the life of the nation), not necessarily 'educated' but self-motivated and interested stakeholders, then you will get decent leaders and governments regardless of if the consitution is the worst despotism.

Two examples: The well-documented Lincoln-Douglas debates from the US. These debates were for the 'common people', the small farmer, not educated at universities and often totally homeschooled. But if you read those debates..man, they were at a high level back then! The 'simple farmers' of early 19th century America were highly intellectually engaged with the politics of their time on many levels, in a complete contrast to the common people of today.

Again, the Roman example: The switch from Republic to Empire was NOT as important as people assume. It was symptomatic, not causative. The real cause was the changing political culture of the people. Rome in the time of Augustus, Trajan, etc was as dynamic and effective as it ever was during the Republic. The virtual collapse of effective government under bribery, corruption, assassination, insanity, etc was a result of a changed political culture. Would Romans of the time of Caesar or Augustus have allowed the sordid affairs of the later emperors to take place? No. The average free roman of the later empire was of a fundamentally different cultural character than his predessors.

What we need is to revive some old and once thought disredited ideas of Decadence and Degeneration.

Is Western civilization, for all its outward signs of power and might, in a period of Decadence and Degeneration? What is the nature of that internal moral rot? And, can we or should we do anything to reverse it? Is it worth saving?

I think these are the most important and overlooked questions of our times.

[Sir Og]

Seeker your are absolutely right that people deserve their government.

I am just wondering if there is a system that can fix some of democracy's problems.
Meritocrasy/technocracy should theoreticaly ensure that the people in government at least have the necessary qualification and that these people don't get elected because they are popular or own TV station or have big corporate sponsors.

[Lorizael]

You have elevated the debate, Seeker. I would offer a response, except that I've gotten about five hours of sleep this week and I think my brother is getting married or something tomorrow.