Democracy, coming to an end?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
In the simpsons I always see that the people from springfield get together to vote, that Is something I like very much, but only possible in small cities I guess

Can someone from the USA explain how is that? is it in all states?

Apparently that is around in New England, townhall meetings and such where people have direct democracy.

I haven't seen or experienced it myself and I don't know how wide spread it is, but tha'ts the rumor.

Elsewhere, all functions of government are open to the public. Your city council will have open meetings and the public is invited to attend and speak at the meeting, and usually do. They don't have any formal voting power in such meetings, but they can exercise some good influence on the process. If you have some small town city council meeting and 50 voters show up to complain about X issue, you can be reasonably sure the council will do something about it. Getting people to care and getting them active is always the main obstacle.

The problem as I see it is not a problem with democracy. Democracy IS the ideal system. However it doesn't work as well in certain situations. Our real problem is one of population and technology.

The earth's population is massive and growing. You can't have an effective direct democracy (or a really effective representative one) in a country with hundreds of millions of people. I say technology because larger and larger countries are becoming more possible and needed. The evolution of countries into entities like the EU I think is inevitable. Just like how the US used to be more state based, and now it is more national focused. Just the changing technology.

I think federalism is a good answer, or at least a helpful band aid. But even the US, as I said, is losing its federalism as the national government takes more and more power.

[Pekka]

Well, how do you go to 'too many people' into ideal system?

When we have too many people, we can't have direct influence what so ever. It's just impossible. And we know, that if we take the truly average cut on all the people, it results into .. extremely average.

So, why would we ever want to go with that? All I'ms aying is, that it's worth debating, that if this should be the way of the future, we should at least then pick the very best leaders instead of the extremely average.

I think we are dumbing down the whole society, we have a dream of 'average man can make it'. Sure, sure, absolutely. However, thinking that 'well, I like it when every leader is average too, because it reminds me I can make it there also'. That's like.. positive thinking, however, it really is a stupid idea.

I'm smart enough to know we need the best guys, and I'm not one of them. I'll just give myself a waver to step out, because I KNOW I'm not the one who should be chosen. And I also know we shouldn't choose my neighbour either. I can deal with the fact that I shouldn't be in that table where all these decisions are made, but why can't the average voter accept it as well?

We should have high standards, because on average, we get better decisions made when the best people are making them, it's just a fact.

[Ned]

Well, I do like the initiative and referendum aspect of direct democracy. I think we should have a vote of the whole people on important issues like taxes and war. The Senate can be composed of the wise old heads as in the Roman Republic. In the US, these could be ex-presidents and ex-governors. They would recommend laws to the people for a vote and would suggest a range of candidates to be elected president.

But, isn't this "better" system I outline here actually the Roman Republic itself?

[BeBMan]

Anything special in this thread about democracies? I mean general whining about people having power due to their money or about stupid politicians fits for lots of other systems too (and sometimes even more in less or undemocratic societies)

[snoopy369]

The roman republic worked so well too

I love it when people yearn for the classical age ... it's so cute ...

[Pekka]

bebro, shut your face about whining you stupid kraut, the next time you characterize everything that is not positive as whining, you'll just once again proof you are not worthy of a single square millimeter of human skin.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
In the simpsons I always see that the people from springfield get together to vote, that Is something I like very much, but only possible in small cities I guess

Can someone from the USA explain how is that? is it in all states?

That's kind of the idealized New England model which is how it used to be in many places. People would have a meeting in town hall and everyone in town would show up. Now days they have a meeting in town hall in a city of 1.2 million, 25 people show up, and 5 of them are on the city council and the other 20 are paid by special interests. The average people don't seem to bother any more.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

swiss system = the best.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Yes,
democracy ifs far away from the best system possible,
yet still the best system we currently have in the world.

Although there are differences:
IMHO the best form of democracy is the direct democracy which AFAIK at the moment only exists (in some form) in Switzerland.
In it the citizens don´t have only power at the elections after which the policy is determined by the elected party (until the next election) but instead the citizens have great political power via referenda.

One thing that, for example, was determined via Referendum was the decision, that all transit cargo traffic across switzerland has to cross switzerland via train. A decision which has been the right one, as it seems, both for ecological reasons as well as for economical reasons (As you don´t have so much trucks damaging the streets and the swiss rail earns lots of money by transporting the cargo )

I doubt that Switzerland had made this decision if it had been a representational democracy (like almost all other democracies in the world)

Yup. Swiss democracy is the best

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_history_of_Switzerland

Women were granted the right to vote federally in 1971, however women where only given the vote cantonally gradually and the in the last remaining canton (Appenzell Innerrhoden) only in 1992, and then by a judicial decision against the will of the resisting canton

[snoopy369]

I love wikipedia ...

From that same article:

With a population composed of a roughly balanced combination of Roman Catholics and Protestants, together amounting to more than 95%, the population without any religious affiliation has grown to more than 10% in the 2000s, while the Muslim population grew from practically nil to some 4% over the past decades.

Erm, so they have nearly 110% the population? No wonder the Swiss are such good bankers! They can squeeze an extra 10% out of anything...

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Pekka
bebro, shut your face about whining you stupid kraut, the next time you characterize everything that is not positive as whining, you'll just once again proof you are not worthy of a single square millimeter of human skin.

Whiner.

[Pekka]

worthless skin rack!!

[BeBMan]

Ok, I was wrong. You're a superwhiner

[Pekka]

superwinner.

[BeBMan]

Of the WTF contest.....