Page 1 of 2
#1
Seriously.
There's so much bullcrap between the GOP and Dems these days that it seems like they kinda forget about the 99.999% of other people who live in this country.
Agree?
love is love // return to dust
#2
That's politics for ya?
And what is more, there's been a bloody purple nose and some bloody purple clothes that were messing up the lobby floor. It's just apartment house rules so all you 'partment fools remember : one man's ceiling is another man's floor.
#4
Quote by Nietsche
Yeah, that's because representative democracy is basically designed to prevent regular people's opinions getting heard.

EDIT: This Noam Chomsky video explains it pretty well:

Noam Chomsky - America is not a Democracy



The thing is America's not a Democracy. Say the Pledge of allegiance. You no the part that say's, And to the Republic for which it stands. We are a republic. Democracy's fail. Every one in history has failed.


Here's a Video that explains different forms of Government: Linky
If you start a reply with: I have never played one but I have heard good things about it! Your opinion is invalid.
Last edited by boxcarmonument at Dec 21, 2009,
#6
Quote by boxcarmonument
Democracy's fail. Every one in history has failed.


Most of the ones I know of only failed because of outside pressure. The only reason democracy fails is because certain groups of people benefit from keeping the rest of us from having any say and so they do everything within their power to prevent truly democratic societies from forming. If we could get rid of them or loosen their grip then we'd be home free
#7
Quote by boxcarmonument
The thing is America's not a Democracy. Say the Pledge of allegiance. You no the part that say's, And to the Republic for which it stands. We are a republic. Democracy's fail. Every one in history has failed.


Here's a Video that explains different forms of Government: Linky

I agree with you, but do keep in mind that every civilization has failed thus far, excluding modern societies.
#9
if your asking this question your senile

but yes it is highly dysfunctional and like most political parties they often help their parties goal's rather than the goal's of the people
Quote by lespaul#1
Dr_Shred wins the thread



LEAVE THE PASTRIES ALONE!!!
#10
Quote by boxcarmonument
The thing is America's not a Democracy. Say the Pledge of allegiance. You no the part that say's, And to the Republic for which it stands. We are a republic. Democracy's fail. Every one in history has failed.


Here's a Video that explains different forms of Government: Linky



A republic is a government in which the head of the state is not a monarch.
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#11
Quote by Eliyahu


A republic is a government in which the head of the state is not a monarch.


Yeah, but the founding fathers used the term "republic" to distuinguish it from direct and participatory democratic systems:

"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy ..." - James Madison, The Federalist No. 10
Last edited by Nietsche at Dec 21, 2009,
#12
Quote by Nietsche
Yeah, but the founding fathers used the term "republic" to distuinguish it from direct and participatory democratic systems:

"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy ..." - James Madison, The Federalist No. 10

But what the other person was saying is that we are not a democracy, we are a republic, assuming you can only be one. The fact is, we are both.

EDIT: and obviously what James Madison is calling a republic is what we call a representative democracy today.
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#14
Is the US government dysfunctional?


Isn't that the case with every government on earth?
Quote by Zero-Hartman
Damn you, bodyheatseeker

Quote by Paramore.
bodyheatseeker, I will NEVER forgive you.

#15
Quote by Eliyahu


A republic is a government in which the head of the state is not a monarch.



Heads of state in the U.S are not monarchs. They are voted in by the People. Monarchs are born into power or have absolute power over the people.



mon·arch (mŏn'ərk, -ärk')
n.

1.

One who reigns over a state or territory, usually for life and by hereditary right, especially:
1.

A sole and absolute ruler.
2.

A sovereign, such as a king or empress, often with constitutionally limited authority: a constitutional monarch.
2.

One that commands or rules: "I am monarch of all I survey" (William Cowper).
3.

One that surpasses others in power or preeminence: "Mont Blanc is the monarch of the mountains" (Byron).
4.
___________________________________________________________________
Republic
- 5 dictionary results
re⋅pub⋅lic
  /rɪˈpʌblɪk/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
Use republic in a Sentence
See web results for republic
See images of republic
–noun
1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.
3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.
4. (initial capital letter) any of the five periods of republican government in France. Compare First Republic, Second Republic, Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic.
5. (initial capital letter, italics) a philosophical dialogue (4th century b.c.) by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.


Before you facepalm somebody. Maybe you should take a few lessons in Government.
If you start a reply with: I have never played one but I have heard good things about it! Your opinion is invalid.
Last edited by boxcarmonument at Dec 21, 2009,
#16
Quote by Eliyahu
But what the other person was saying is that we are not a democracy, we are a republic, assuming you can only be one. The fact is, we are both.

EDIT: and obviously what James Madison is calling a republic is what we call a representative democracy today.


You're only a democracy in a certain sense though in that you have decisions made for you by elected representatives instead of making the decisions for yourselves. Not to mention that the only real choices you have are democrats and republicans seeing as how pretty much every other candidate is doomed to failure.

That's one of the things that's good about the UK. We actually get third party candidates in once in a while. It'd be even better if the LibDems got elected and enacted their proposed constitutional reforms, but that probably won't happen for a while yet
#17
Quote by boxcarmonument
Heads of state in the U.S are not monarchs. They are voted in by the People. Monarchs are born into power or have absolute power over the people.


Before you facepalm somebody. Maybe you should take a few lessons in Government.


I think you misunderstood my facepalm... Of course the US isn't run by a monarch! I'm not an idiot! You are suggesting we are a republic in place of a democracy when a democracy is a republic.
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#18
Quote by Eliyahu
You are suggesting we are a republic in place of a democracy when a democracy is a republic.


I suppose there could be forms of government without monarchy or democracy like technocracy

Though on the whole you're right.
#19
Quote by Nietsche
Yeah, that's because representative democracy is basically designed to prevent regular people's opinions getting heard.

EDIT: This Noam Chomsky video explains it pretty well:

Noam Chomsky - America is not a Democracy


I was about to post that >.<

edit: i suppose it's only logical, see a thread about america and its government and head straight to chomsky
#21
Quote by Eliyahu
I think you misunderstood my facepalm... Of course the US isn't run by a monarch! I'm not an idiot! You are suggesting we are a republic in place of a democracy when a democracy is a republic.



They are 2 separate forms of Government. No where in the Constitution is the word democracy.

Wall of text alert:


Is the United States a democracy?

The Pledge of Allegiance includes the phrase: "and to the republic for which it stands." Is the United States of America a republic? I always thought it was a democracy? What's the difference between the two?

The United States is, indeed, a republic, not a democracy. Accurately defined, a democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf. The Framers of the Constitution were altogether fearful of pure democracy. Everything they read and studied taught them that pure democracies "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths" (Federalist No. 10).

By popular usage, however, the word "democracy" come to mean a form of government in which the government derives its power from the people and is accountable to them for the use of that power. In this sense the United States might accurately be called a democracy. However, there are examples of "pure democracy" at work in the United States today that would probably trouble the Framers of the Constitution if they were still alive to see them. Many states allow for policy questions to be decided directly by the people by voting on ballot initiatives or referendums. (Initiatives originate with, or are initiated by, the people while referendums originate with, or are referred to the people by, a state's legislative body.) That the Constitution does not provide for national ballot initiatives or referendums is indicative of the Framers' opposition to such mechanisms. They were not confident that the people had the time, wisdom or level-headedness to make complex decisions, such as those that are often presented on ballots on election day.

Writing of the merits of a republican or representative form of government, James Madison observed that one of the most important differences between a democracy and a republic is "the delegation of the government [in a republic] to a small number of citizens elected by the rest." The primary effect of such a scheme, Madison continued, was to:

. . . refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the same purpose (Federalist No. 10).

Later, Madison elaborated on the importance of "refining and enlarging the public views" through a scheme of representation:

There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind(Federalist No. 63).

In the strictest sense of the word, the system of government established by the Constitution was never intended to be a "democracy." This is evident not only in the wording of the Pledge of Allegiance but in the Constitution itself which declares that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (Article IV, Section 4). Moreover, the scheme of representation and the various mechanisms for selecting representatives established by the Constitution were clearly intended to produce a republic, not a democracy.

To the extent that the United States of America has moved away from its republican roots and become more "democratic," it has strayed from the intentions of the Constitution's authors. Whether or not the trend toward more direct democracy would be smiled upon by the Framers depends on the answer to another question. Are the American people today sufficiently better informed and otherwise equipped to be wise and prudent democratic citizens than were American citizens in the late 1700s? By all accounts, the answer to this second question is an emphatic "no."

If you start a reply with: I have never played one but I have heard good things about it! Your opinion is invalid.
#22
Quote by Zoot Allures
I was about to post that >.<

edit: i suppose it's only logical, see a thread about america and its government and head straight to chomsky


Chomsky is awesome

Quote by boxcarmonument
Are the American people today sufficiently better informed and otherwise equipped to be wise and prudent democratic citizens than were American citizens in the late 1700s? By all accounts, the answer to this second question is an emphatic "no."


Nice bit of blatant elitism there.
#23
Quote by Nietsche

That's one of the things that's good about the UK. We actually get third party candidates in once in a while. It'd be even better if the LibDems got elected and enacted their proposed constitutional reforms, but that probably won't happen for a while yet


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNB1EUJg1-w
#24
Quote by boxcarmonument
They are 2 separate forms of Government. No where in the Constitution is the word democracy.

Wall of text alert:

There are a lot of things not in the US Constitution, but that doesn't invalidate that fact that we are a representative democracy. James Madison's interpretation of the word "republic" is extremely close to our modern day interpretation of "representative democracy". The power IS in the hands of the people. When leaders go crazy and majority wants them out of office, we vote for someone else.

And quoting massive lengths of text doesn't change the fact that you are wrong.

EDIT: Also, how can you prove the meaning of the Constituion with the Pledge of Allegiance. You obviously don't have clue what you're talking about, and neither does the person who wrote that article. The constitution was ratified in 1788, the Pledge of Allegience was written in 1892.
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
Last edited by Eliyahu at Dec 21, 2009,
#25
Quote by Nietsche
Nice bit of blatant elitism there.



I'd say it's in part true. But it's not a criticism of the ordinary person, it's a demonstration of the inadequacies of bourgeois democracy. People can't help being ignorant of politics when the information which should be freely available to all is eclipsed by a biased media.
#26
Quote by aaciseric




Quote by Eliyahu
The power IS in the hands of the people. When leaders go crazy and majority wants them out of office, we vote for someone else.


You kinda contradicted your first sentence in the second sentence with the words "leaders" and "we vote for someone else". Having representatives is very far from the power being in the hands of the people.

EDIT:
Quote by Pagan-Pie
I'd say it's in part true. But it's not a criticism of the ordinary person, it's a demonstration of the inadequacies of bourgeois democracy. People can't help being ignorant of politics when the information which should be freely available to all is eclipsed by a biased media.


I thought "Bourgeois" was an inadequate term

But yeah, that's basically my thoughts as well. I'd also say it has a little bit to do with people not being involved properly. It makes people apathetic because they feel like their voice doesn't matter anyway so why bother.
Last edited by Nietsche at Dec 21, 2009,
#27
Quote by Nietsche
You kinda contradicted your first sentence in the second sentence with the words "leaders" and "we vote for someone else". Having representatives is very far from the power being in the hands of the people.

Keep in mind that this is opposed to being ruled by an oligarchy or autocracy in which the people have absolutely no say whatsoever. We may not have full power, but the power to elect representatives still makes us a democracy.
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#28
Quote by Eliyahu
Keep in mind that this is opposed to being ruled by an oligarchy or autocracy in which the people have absolutely no say whatsoever. We may not have full power, but the power to elect representatives still makes us a democracy.


Two branches of the same thing to vote for is not a democracy. Watch the video posted on page one.
#29
Quote by Nietsche

I thought "Bourgeois" was an inadequate term

But yeah, that's basically my thoughts as well. I'd also say it has a little bit to do with people not being involved properly. It makes people apathetic because they fell like their voice doesn't matter anyway so why bother.



I just say bourgeois to avoid explaining myself. And it tends to annoy the reactionaries straight off.

And yes, I would say that apathy it one of the most dangerous and depressing features of our society. At least when tyrants were openly tyranical, people would notice and behead them with a guillotine. Now it seems that today's ruling classes have gotten the upper hand, what with all their ****ing media propaganda rubbish.
#30
Quote by boxcarmonument
The thing is America's not a Democracy. Say the Pledge of allegiance. You no the part that say's, And to the Republic for which it stands. We are a republic. Democracy's fail. Every one in history has failed.

I'm going to say this once and hopefully won't have to say it again:

A REPUBLIC IS A TYPE OF DEMOCRACY

Here's the whole damn list. Nobody has failed in anything except you not being a typical angsty teen making outlandish statements.

On topic: Is our government dysfunctional? I'm going to assume you implied our federal government. It's relative. Yes and No - just like any other practiced form of government out there. Some will lose their cases and you'll hear an outcry of outrage. Some will win their cases and you'll hear just the same.
#31
The problem is with the people and the two party system. I get called a republican as an insult, even though I am not one. People would rather have something be black and white, republican or democrat, than actually think about the issues.

Whenever I've been in debates on the internet with a democrat(since I'm libertarian), the democrat just says that I'm lying, or that I buy into republican propaganda. Every single debate has turned into me suppling dozens of links to back-up my claims while the other person just asks more questions. Shouldn't they have looked at these before they made a decision to hate my stances?

And in the end of it all, I've provided links of proof and they've asked questions, they'll boil it down to Obama's key vague principles. The end result is always, "Something has to be done."

We need people to be informed, we need nonpartisan news stations that provide the facts. Not the fake nonpartisan news stations that we already have.
This is why I don't like arguing on the internet.
Quote by damian_91
If only you could back that statement up.
Quote by Zombee
Wolfgang's Philadelphia Study. Look it up yourself.
Quote by damian_91
No need to, absurd generalizations aren't my thing.
#32
Oh my god, you folks are slaughtering the notions of US government with your stiffling semantics.

See, in the modern world, the word democracy is used accurately in several ways. We can think of the genus democracy as all systems in which sovereignty belongs to the demos--the mob--the people. We can also see the species democracy (a member of the democracy genus of course) that some folks call pure democracy and usually means the public voting on each issue that arises. You can use the phrase in either way (and a fair few others) without being wrong, as long as you're articulate enough to clarify what you mean.

The united states is a democratic republic. We call it a democracy because it was built on another, more specific notion of democracy: "liberal democracy." See that's a species of democracy just like your species "pure democracy."

Long story short: it's perfectly accurate to refer to the US as a democracy in one sense, not accurate to do so in another. But the people that refer to it as a democracy rather than a republic aren't morons that think we directly vote for everything, they're people who accurately use the alternative definitions of the word.


---now if you want to decide if the US govt. is dysfunctional, you have to first define what it's function is and then decide if it's performing that function. You'll get very different views on what it's function is from different citizens of the US.
Last edited by dullsilver_mike at Dec 21, 2009,
#33
Quote by Zombee
We need people to be informed, we need nonpartisan news stations that provide the facts. Not the fake nonpartisan news stations that we already have.


I agree, although I think it's generally impossible to report something without some bias getting in.

Quote by dullsilver_mike
The united states is a democratic republic. We call it a democracy because it was built on another, more specific notion of democracy: "liberal democracy." See that's a species of democracy just like your species "pure democracy."

Long story short: it's perfectly accurate to refer to the US as a democracy in one sense, not accurate to do so in another. But the people that refer to it as a democracy rather than a republic aren't morons that think we directly vote for everything, they're people who accurately use the alternative definitions of the word.


I think you're missing the point. The point isn't that the US doesn't have "pure" democracy, the point is that the representative democracy that currently exists in the US doesn't accurately portray the views of the population and has several methods of making sure that peoples views don't stray too far outside the western bourgeois comfort zone.
#34
The government totally sucks
You mother****er
The government totally sucks

Ben franklyn was a rebel indeed
He liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed
He was a genious but if he was here today
The government would **** him up his righteous aayyy
There's a special sex move I do called the Charizard.
It's where you light the girls pubes, then put it out with your cum and run around the room flapping your arms screaming, "You don't have enough badges to train me!"
#35
Quote by tancanada
Seriously.
There's so much bullcrap between the GOP and Dems these days that it seems like they kinda forget about the 99.999% of other people who live in this country.
Agree?
These days? It's been like that since the beginning. Federalists and Anti-Federalists etc.
*-)
Quote by Bob_Sacamano
i kinda wish we all had a penis and vagina instead of buttholes

i mean no offense to buttholes and poop or anything

Rest in Peace, Troy Davis and Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis and Eric Garner and Mike Brown
#36
Quote by dullsilver_mike
Oh my god, you folks are slaughtering the notions of US government with your stiffling semantics.

See, in the modern world, the word democracy is used accurately in several ways. We can think of the genus democracy as all systems in which sovereignty belongs to the demos--the mob--the people. We can also see the species democracy (a member of the democracy genus of course) that some folks call pure democracy and usually means the public voting on each issue that arises. You can use the phrase in either way (and a fair few others) without being wrong, as long as you're articulate enough to clarify what you mean.

The united states is a democratic republic. We call it a democracy because it was built on another, more specific notion of democracy: "liberal democracy." See that's a species of democracy just like your species "pure democracy."

Long story short: it's perfectly accurate to refer to the US as a democracy in one sense, not accurate to do so in another. But the people that refer to it as a democracy rather than a republic aren't morons that think we directly vote for everything, they're people who accurately use the alternative definitions of the word.


This is what I've been trying to say. Have a kudo (or 7).
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#37
Quote by Nietsche
I agree, although I think it's generally impossible to report something without some bias getting in.


That is true, but news stations' sole purpose seems to have strayed from relaying news to representing facts that parallel the station's agenda. All they've done recently is create animosity between democrats and republicans, when that only skews the issues.

Imagine if the US didn't have a two-party system.
This is why I don't like arguing on the internet.
Quote by damian_91
If only you could back that statement up.
Quote by Zombee
Wolfgang's Philadelphia Study. Look it up yourself.
Quote by damian_91
No need to, absurd generalizations aren't my thing.
#39
Quote by Zombee
That is true, but news stations' sole purpose seems to have strayed from relaying news to representing facts that parallel the station's agenda. All they've done recently is create animosity between democrats and republicans, when that only skews the issues.

Imagine if the US didn't have a two-party system.

If we didn't have a two-party system, our citizens may show some signs of intelligience, instead of going "Obama sucks because he is a democrat!"
Also, I imagine bills would get through Congress faster, because congressmen wouldn't go, "Oh, a republican bill? NO."
Quote by Wulphy
Being a Republican should be a handicap.
#40
Quote by Zombee
Imagine if the US didn't have a two-party system.


Imagine if we didn't have a party system at all.
Page 1 of 2