Is Democracy Over-rated?

[Njaco]

No worries Nuuumann. Maybe I didn't express myself very well. Like Buffnut, with all its warts this is still the best mode of government around. My point, I guess that I was trying to make is that there is a very real distiction between ideal democracy and democracy in practice (similiar to Marxist Communism amd Stalinist Communism). Because I work and am a small part of the government, I see how there is a blurred line between idealogly and reality.

Don't get me wrong. I love this country and welcome the form of government we have. But when every once and awhile, through my job, I have somebody arrested and brought to court in shackles because they didn't get their dog licensed for $10, it does bother me on some level.

 

[tyrodtom]

The president almost revered like a god !! In the USA ?? Not in my lifetime.

 

[buffnut453]

Nuuumannn,

I didn't say PR was unworkable, simply that it had to be implemented very, very carefully. Look at Italy in the 1990s - the entire political process was stymied because there were just too many political parties.

To your other point, forcing people to vote doesn't solve the 2 underlying issues I identified. Letting ill-informed people decide the future path of the nation is profoundly illogical. It's the best we've got and I don't see many workable alternatives but the problems remain. My last para about only allowing people to vote if they had attained a certain level of cognitive ability is one way to enable more informed elections but I think it's impractical to implement and would result in a huge swath of disenfranchised people who would definitely not support the idea.

 

[buffnut453]

Nuuumannn,

One other point - you say that restricting voting to a certain demographic would not be democratic (now there's a sentence - let's all say it together 3 times, quickly!). I guess it depends on your definition of democratic. In an entirely democratic society, the people would have an opportunity to vote on all key aspects of the day. That was impractical in the past but with technological advances may become increasingly feasible. Our current democratic models overcame the issue by electing representatives but, even then, there have been times when voting was restricted to certain groups - only land-owning white males, for instance. Again, I'm not say restricted voting is right, just that it's one way to overcome the current democratic model's problems.

 

[Readie]

The president almost revered like a god !! In the USA ?? Not in my lifetime.

JFK was wasn't he Tom?

 

[Readie]

".... populations are hardly better informed today than they were in the past"

I would argue that on many things populations are less well informed today -- people are exposed to so much information that they no longer know what or who they are.

MM

Michael. yes you are right. Too much information. But, also too much biased information. If you google the EU /EZ problems you will gey ummpteen sites, all very august and learned that people quote from chapter and verse but..look further and you'll see polictical (and worse) bias etc lurking in the shadows.

Proganda is a subject that intrigues me, from the clipped very English tones of Pathe news in WW2 and the 1950's to the same faintly patronising tone of the early Television programmes. Auntie knows best you know...

The one thing that I think is healthy is robust ridicule and caustic wit in papers like Private Eye to expose the bigwigs and polictical animals for what they really are.

John

 

[buffnut453]

Sadly, there's no such thing as pristine, unbiased opinion. Briefing papers prepared by Whitehall mandarins are heavily doctored to present the British Government in the best light or to point towards the result that the sitting Government wants to achieve. The press are no better, indeed they're worse because we can't vote them out of office. As for t'internet - well, the least said about that the better. We are constantly subject to information that has been filtered, processed and spun. The only way through it is to read both sides of the argument (or all sides, as there are often many more than just 2 views on an issue) and then attempt to make your own mind up. And we all have plenty of time each day to do that, don't we????

 

[nuuumannn]

The one thing that I think is healthy is robust ridicule and caustic wit in papers like Private Eye to expose the bigwigs and polictical animals for what they really are.

I used to love reading Private Eye! That programme with Paul Merton and Ian Hislop, Private Eye's ed, with Angus Deaton was brilliant as well!

Sadly, this whole 'feel good' approach in government with an excess of spin doctors has been adopted from big business; it's all based on someone's business model for promoting a healthy attitude in the workplace. In the company I work for there is a lot of that, catch phrases creep in to corporate speeches, like "blah blah blah, going forward..." We used to play W**k bingo to see how many of these buzz words would appear in 'state of the nation' addresses. All they do is alienate the work force, the same with the general population.

Hey NJACO, I don't know much about the law, but I get what you're saying; I remember a few years back a farmer shot a burglar stealing from his barn, but the farmer ended up in prison as a result. There was a national outcry here, and I think (I hope) the law has been changed.

buffnut453, I'd be careful about the credibility of using Italy as an example of illustrating your point but I understand what you are saying about PR; there are, however, more examples where it has worked successfully than not, after implementation. As I said, it's not perfect; the current system is up for overhaul here, even if it is voted in again, but it is a fairer system than FPP.

Regarding disinformation; at least we have forums like this!

 

[tyrodtom]

JFK was wasn't he Tom?

JFK's popularity might have actually went up AFTER he was killed. But during his short stay in the white house he had his detractors just like any president, he wasn't very popular in the south.

 

[nuuumannn]

Americans elevating the President to god-like status? Maybe that's a bit of an exxaggeration on my part but to the rest of the world it at least looks that way. Could you imagine the British, New Zealand or Australian population being expected to behave in a similar way toward their prime ministers as Americans do toward their presidents? Not gonna happen!

 

[tyrodtom]

You people don't live here, you've really got no idea how we treat our presidents.

Just a for instance, how many presidents have been assasinated ? How many serious attempts? Now ask the same question about British Prime ministers, or Australian, or New Zealand, etc.

I admit, that is a extreme example.

I'm getting off topic I think, nice debate though.

 

[buffnut453]

Part of the problem with English-speaking nations is a tendency to assume that the fact of us speaking the same(ish) language leads to closer similarities in other areas. People are often shocked at how different we all are and, to get this rambling post back on-topic, how different our political institutions are. Those of us who are familiar with Parliamentary democracy, where a political party is elected with a manifesto of policies and the leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister, are confused by the furore developed over, say, US Presidential elections when the President is greatly limited in what he/she can do by Congress and the Senate. To a non-US observer, the "promises" made during the electoral campaign bear no reality to the actual changes implemented after election. US and Parliamentary approaches are very different forms of democracy, and there are others - just look at Europe!

 

[Readie]

JFK's popularity might have actually went up AFTER he was killed. But during his short stay in the white house he had his detractors just like any president, he wasn't very popular in the south.

Fair comment Tom.Just goes to show how ones trans Atlantic perception can differ from reality.
If you had said that the Iron (hearted) lady Mrs Thatcher was revered in the UK I would have challenged you
Cheers
John

 

[Readie]

I used to love reading Private Eye! That programme with Paul Merton and Ian Hislop, Private Eye's ed, with Angus Deaton was brilliant as well

Have I got news for you. Brilliant and I love getting idiots like Nigel Farage on it. They never fail....

John

 

[N4521U]

Americans elevating the President to god-like status? Maybe that's a bit of an exxaggeration on my part but to the rest of the world it at least looks that way. Could you imagine the British, New Zealand or Australian population being expected to behave in a similar way toward their prime ministers as Americans do toward their presidents? Not gonna happen!

Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!

 

[Readie]

Part of the problem with English-speaking nations is a tendency to assume that the fact of us speaking the same(ish) language leads to closer similarities in other areas. US and Parliamentary approaches are very different forms of democracy, and there are others - just look at Europe!

Very true and well said.
We do assume (too much sometimes).
Do we have to look at Europe though....

John

 

[tyrodtom]

I think Mrs. Thatcher might have been better liked in the USA than Britain.

 

[buffnut453]

Do we have to look at Europe though....

No but it's hard not to sneak the occasional peak through the gaps between one's fingers - it's like a train wreck that you can see about to happen but you just can't stop yourself from looking.

 

[buffnut453]

Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!

The US electoral process in the 18th century wouldn't be what you refer to as democratic either - no votes for women, no votes for blacks etc etc. Don't forget, Britain was a republic before the US was!

On a more serious note, the point you raise reinforces my previous post about lack of similarities between the various political systems. All are considered "democratic" but they vary widely and anyone who grows up in one system finds it hard to comprehend the others.

 

[Readie]

Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!

Not entirely, we gave the colonies ( including your America) stable governing and democracy.
The commonwealth have had their chances to 'boot out the British' Monarchy and chosen not to.
Blood is thicker than water
John