Rule By The People?

[Jason Tandro]

Odds are you won't be able to walk 10 meters in America without running into some body blindly talking about how great it is to live in a democracy. That's fine, except America isn't a democracy. It's a Republic.

As a democracy is defined as "rule by the people" each person having an equal say in every matter that is ever brought up we are stuck with this situation. A literal democracy is impossible in a political system containing more than a few people. All "democracies" are really republics. In a republic, the people elect representatives to make and enforce laws.

Source here.

Now the issue is this? Should we be a full-on democracy? In a country of our size, I think not. But frankly since all humans are stupid (oh sure there is the occasional genius, but then they are so wrapped up in their own ego at being the least smelly turd that they are equally as stupid) no system of government is without its flaws.

Democracy- all the idiots get together and grin moronically.

Republic- a few of the richer, handsomer, more PR friendy idiots get together and grin moronically.

Parliament- a few idiots grin moronially and stay in power until their particular group of idiots gets kicked out the back door.

Dictatorship / Monarchy- one or two idiots rule the roost in the name of their idiot god or the fact that they have the inalienable right to behead you at a moment's notice.

Communism / Socialism- good in theory except idiots don't know how to share and are instinctively greedy little bastards.

Oligarchy- the richest idiots get together and grin moronically on top of piles of cash and when they're done riding their robot t-rexes with two gorgeous women on either side of them shooting laser beams into nearby schoolyards, they may put down the beer and remote and actually try to govern.

Theocracy- a bunch of idiots get together and don't have to make any decisions because an unseen idiot god is making the calls for them.

Anarchy-a whole group of idiots have given up the pretense of being smart and proceed to pillage, loot and rape their way into early graves and a life of fear and hatred.

I'm rambling on, but you get my point. No system of government is, has, or ever will be perfect. So can we say: "hey this is the best we can do?" or do we just give up and go home and watch idiot wrestling.

[Freedan]

A full-on democracy would never work with a country that size. People are split over any number of issues as it is, and if a vote were required for everything by everyone, it would take forever for anything to get done.

Voter turnout for elections is already not as high as it should be. I have to believe that turnout for these other issues would be lower if people were required to vote every couple of months (which is kind of sad, since we have the right to vote in our countries, but many people consider it a burden).

Our government works by parliament, and it works well enough for us. It would be better if they adjusted the representation levels for some areas of the country (one part of the country that doesn't want to BE a part of the country has a fair share of seats in our parliament).

Parliamentary and Republic governments can work just fine, as long as they do things according to the will of the people that elected them, and not based on their own desires. They're really just there to streamline the process of getting things done for everyone.

[Jason Tandro]

Freedan, the Dark Knight wrote:

which is kind of sad, since we have the right to vote in our countries, but many people consider it a burden).

Actually voting isn't merely a right. It's a duty. If you're an American, you need to vote. If you're uninformed about the issues at hand, you need to educate yourselves. And let's not forget the old line: "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain."

[psychokind]

democracy /republic/parliament suck ass, because democracy always means the lowest effective compromise for everyone.

communism / socialism... fools! humas =! machines

theocracy / dictatorship / monarchy is relatively uneffective today, can work in exceptions, means as long as the leader is a supermind

anarchy just doesn't exist for humans.

so my vote goes for oligarchy, but for sth that's called "council of sages" (rat der weisen) in german. that's practically the most intelligent and effective people running the country. indipendent and bipartisan people, not affected by personal motives or emotions, ideals or perceptions, only with clear visible rational effects in mind - almost the same as machines rouling the country, just that it's economical humans.

[EverPhoenix]

i heard a quote somewhere once

"our current system of government is the worst working system we have"

//paraphrased


i think there is some element of truth in this, because i dont think anything can truly work as its needed. there will always be people who are unhappy, there will always be those who will try to change things.

i think a system of anarchy in which everyone is good to each other would be best, but thats just never going to happen. humans are aggressive bastards.

[Jason Tandro]

Which is exactly why I fear psychokind's council of sages idea is a bad joke. Who determines what individuals are the most enlightened and most rational when every human alive, intelligent or not, has an agenda. In fact one could argue that the more intelligent a person is, the more easily they can manipulate the system in their favor (ahem Hitler).

[psychokind]

Jason Tandro wrote:

Which is exactly why I fear psychokind's council of sages idea is a bad joke. Who determines what individuals are the most enlightened and most rational when every human alive, intelligent or not, has an agenda. In fact one could argue that the more intelligent a person is, the more easily they can manipulate the system in their favor (ahem Hitler).

if you got a manager who manages to save a sinking company in a very effective and awesome way without losing many jobs, then the state should offering him twice his earlier payment. a very simple example, but I think you know what I mean.

it would be a start to raise the payment for politicians. seriously, if you're a very clever guy, 8000 € in parliament or 80000 € in free economy?