February 12, 2012
-
Democracy
I’ve been away from this site too long. I’ll try a comeback discussion for a change:
Do you favor Democracy as a form of government?
What limits, if any, should be placed on democratic decisions?
Please answer below – explain your reasoning [if you can
]
Comments (10)
Hmmm Do you mean the one man one vote majority rule type of governing?
Democracy traditionally has been one the worlds worst and most tyrannical forms of government. A system, such and the USA’s, that strongly limits (by way of the Constitution) and dilutes (through representatives instead of direct votes) the will of the people is as good a systems as I have ever seen.
I do not prefer a democracy, too unstable and tyranical. I’d prefer a republic similar to our republic with more limits though on lobbyists and money related to elections and gifts to politicians.
Self rule is preferable to tyranny. Liberty unleashes the human spirit.
I give up!
A Democracy is usually thought of as one where the citizens rule themselves through a series of votes expressing their thoughts and will. In a large developed nation such as the US, that will is usually expressed by representives elected to manage the government, with the assumption that they will act in accordance with the will of those who elected them. As a Democracy seldom reaches absolute consensus on important points, the will of the majority is held to be most acceptable will of the people. Another aspect of classic democracy is that the citizens select their government leaders , who continue in office as long as they have the backing of the citizens.
When the United States of America was founded and its present form of government was worked out, Many of the founders regarded democracy with suspicion and decided to limit direct democratic selection of the governing body [congress] to just the lower house [House of Representatives]. Senators would be selected by the various State legislators as they saw fit and the President would be selected by Electors selected in each state by majority vote. The Constitution set up the form of government and was democratically agreed to by the convention members who sent it to the various states [all 13 of them] where it was to be ratified ratified with the proviso that it would become the organization of the US government upon ratification of nine of the states. By 1789, eleven of the states had ratified and the first elections were held {RI and NC refused to ratify and did not join the union until after the new government was in effect.]
During the past 200+ years, the US has become a much larger and more democratic nation. Now all members of congress are democratically selected through direct state elections and the presedintial electoral college has become almost a formality, with the electors voting as instructed by their constituants. That last anti-democratic vestige does however, still give citizens of smaller states a considerable advantage in selecting the president.
Throughout history democracies have been subject to the same undesirable problems as other forms of government : Corruption, Undemocratic influence, Demagogues, Tyranny, etc. The Democracy does have one good thing going for it however, it is much easier to right bad decisions and remove bad law-makers than any other form of government.
@RobertLeeRE - A Republic, is by definition, a non-monarchial or non-aristocraticlly governed nation. A Democracy is a nation governed through the will of the people. A Republic may have any form – dictatorships are the most common.
@Socrates_Cafe -
Democracy means majority rule yet our checks and balances and republic (representatives appointed) form of government do not allow these things.
I will have to disagree with some of the things you said, namely that America is a democracy. According to the constitution America is a republic. In fact the definition on Wikipedia agrees with me and I cannot say it better then them when they say:
“A republic is a form of government in which the people, or some significant portion of them, have supreme control over the government and where offices of state are elected or chosen by elected people. In modern times, a common simplified definition of a republic is a government where the head of state is not a monarch. The word republic is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as “the public affair”, and often used to describe a state using this form of government.”
“Both modern and ancient republics vary widely in their ideology and composition. In classical and medieval times the archetype of all republics was the Roman Republic, which referred to Rome in between the period when it had kings, and the periods when it had emperors. The Italian medieval and Renaissance political tradition today referred to as ‘”civic humanism”‘ is sometimes considered to derive directly from Roman republicans such as Sallust and Tacitus. However, Greek-influenced Roman authors, such as Polybius and Cicero, sometimes also used the term as a translation for the Greek politeia which could mean regime generally, but could also be applied to certain specific types of regime which did not exactly correspond to that of the Roman Republic. An example of this is Sparta, which had two kings but was not considered a normal monarchy as it also had ephors representing the common people. Republics were not equated with classical democracies such as Athens, but had a democratic aspect to them.”
“In modern republics such as the United States and India, the executive is legitimized both by a constitution and by popular suffrage. Montesquieu included both democracies, where all the people have a share in rule, and aristocracies or oligarchies, where only some of the people rule, as republican forms of government.”
Consider the evidence of some of these things:
The words “Democracy,” “Democratic” or “Democrat” are not in any of the founding documents, not in the Articles of Confederation, nor the Declaration of Independence, not [even]in the Constitution.
“Republican” and “Republic” however are found here and there in these documents.
Even our grade school pledge of allegiance is evidence for the form of government we are. How many remember saying this?
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
@RobertLeeRE - And your point is?
Democracy and Republic are certainly not mutually exclusive descriptive terms. Republic generally refers to nation governed by its citizens (or some of them anyway). The classic Roman Republic was in fact governed mostly by hereditary Senators – who selected most of the government officials – with the exception of the Tribunes who were selected more democrsatically. Democracies are pretty much as Soc defined them.
Trying to compare Republic and Democracy is sort of saying “Do you want to go to Chicago, or by bus?”
Unless you are trying to suggest that the US is not a democracy – which will come as a shock to about 90% of the electorate.
As I remember, one of the founders of the Republican Party once said “…and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Was he convinced that the US was, and should be, democratically governed?
@tychecat -
If you are that ignorant and argumentive to understand my point I am afraid you do not deserve a response.
@RobertLeeRE -
I gather, from your comments to tychecat, that you do not favor democratic government. Why not?
My understanding is that the US is a republic governed by representatives who are selected democratically. It is assumed that these representatives make their decisions in a democratic manner with due consideration for the rights of minority opinion as required by agreed upon law [The Constitution].
Modern media developments and recent Supreme Court decisions have somewhat skewed the election process in favor of those with the most media access. In most presidential elections, the candidate with the most votes has won, with some notable exceptions – the last being the election of 2000. Had the majority candidate won, the US’s recent history probably would have been quite different.