Not sure how much time I’ll actually be able to contribute to this, but I thought it was an interesting topic that deserved its own thread.
One thing I’ll initially point out is that the US is not a democracy, it’s a republic.
I do actually agree with some of the problems you bring up here. More later. Hopefully.
Also never got the answer to that question of where you are from, TT.
[quote]TigerTime wrote:<<< I don’t like this nation as founded. There. I have no problem in saying it. >>>[/quote]I just now saw this months later. TigerTime has just gone up about 12 notches on my respectometer. I couldn’t mean anything more
I just saw it earlier today as well.
I’d be interested in hearing him explain this a bit.
Also, TT, are you an American, yourself? I’ve never seen you say and I get a vague (but not complete) impression that you are not. [/quote]
Bumped as TT appears to be reading this again and I’m pretty sure you missed it buried under all those other posts. [/quote]
Not much to say, I just don’t think democracy is a particularly good system. Some problems here:
Rational ignorance: You only have one vote and that vote doesn’t mean much, so there’s not much practical incentive to spend hours reading up on each candidates policies and history, etc. because this lack of incentive is virtually universal, you end up with a population that doesn’t care much about politics and people start basing their choices off of stupid shit like which candidate has the hottest wife.
Package deals: Your only choice is between platforms that have a shot at winning and these platforms contain far too many issues (really, all of them) so you can’t truly vote for what you want. In the case of bills, bills get stuffed with hundreds to thousands of pages worth of additional nonsense that no rational citizen could possibly care to read through. Most people don’t agree 100% with any candidate, so what you’re really doing is merely voting for the candidate you disagree with the least, which brings me to point 3…
Voting against, not for: Even in a system with dozens of parties, you always end up with only a couple of big parties that get shuffled in and out of power. This is because people take note of past election results and typically, everyone who voted for a candidate that came third or less will ditch their candidate next time around out of fear of wasting their vote and instead vote for which of the top two candidates they disagree with the least. This way, even if they really aren’t getting what they want, at least they can help ensure the guy they really hate doesn’t come into power.
Voting wars: group A wants group B’s stuff, so they vote themselves group B’s stuff. This pretty much cluster fucks the whole system as this transforms elections from a competition of ideas to finding ways to use the system as a justification for theft. The result is, candidates can win not because they exhibit any real prowess in economics, but because their platform was basically “vote for me and you won’t lose your shit to these guys!”/“Vote for me and you’ll get more stuff!”. It is in this way that democracy actually subsidizes stupidity. You have 5 kids and no savings? No problem! Go on welfare and vote yourself the money of couples who took time to save up enough money to properly raise their kids! << through democracy, you’ve disincentivised responsible parenting and incentivised irresponsible parenting. Not surprisingly, voting wars is where a lot of racial tension escalates.
To be completely honest, I see no reason why a government is needed at all, but if you must have one, I’d go with a meritocracy. [/quote]