Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 108
Thanks Tree28Thanks

Thread: The best argument against democracy

  1. #31
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    66,606
    Thanks
    47506

    From
    So. Md.
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    first, your statement "tyranny of the majority" is simply another way of stating the rule of the majority - which is what democracy, simply stated, is. as to information, the Swiss have the answer to that and it is both elegant and simple. besides, there is now - and would be in a democracy - a constitution which guarantees your rights as a citizen. all you have to do to make it complete is to stipulate that a majority vote is based on the number of registered voters, not the number of citizens who vote. now, that means if you don't vote, you have, in essence, voted against the measure.
    Direct democracy is one form of democracy that can work in small homogenous populations. it would NEVER work in a country as large and as diverse as this one. Representative democracy is better suited to our set of circumstances.

  2. #32
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    first, your statement "tyranny of the majority" is simply another way of stating the rule of the majority - which is what democracy, simply stated, is. as to information, the Swiss have the answer to that and it is both elegant and simple. besides, there is now - and would be in a democracy - a constitution which guarantees your rights as a citizen. all you have to do to make it complete is to stipulate that a majority vote is based on the number of registered voters, not the number of citizens who vote. now, that means if you don't vote, you have, in essence, voted against the measure.
    Switzerland is a unitary state and the US is not a unitary state.

  3. #33
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    61,696
    Thanks
    19103

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    first, your statement "tyranny of the majority" is simply another way of stating the rule of the majority - which is what democracy, simply stated, is.
    Explain how it is that a majority of voters voted against GW Bush and D. Trump and yet they both slithered into the presidency to do grave damage to us?
    Last edited by Devil505; 11th February 2018 at 07:33 AM.
    Thanks from OldGaffer

  4. #34
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    14,542
    Thanks
    5358

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Babba View Post
    Direct democracy is one form of democracy that can work in small homogenous populations. it would NEVER work in a country as large and as diverse as this one. Representative democracy is better suited to our set of circumstances.
    homogeneous? not hardly. they are diverse mixture of French, German, Italian and Slovak with about a 10% mixture of immigrants from many countries. I'd hardly call that homogeneous.

  5. #35
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    14,542
    Thanks
    5358

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Explain how it is that a majority of voters voted against GW Bush and D. Trump and yet they both slithered into the presidency to do grave damage to us?
    in a direct democracy (my personal preference is a modified constitutional democracy) the president cannot veto anything, as he is only the head of the executive branch of government. kinda hard to do any damage when you have no legislative authority. of course, the same thing goes for the legislative branch in a real democracy.

  6. #36
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    61,696
    Thanks
    19103

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    in a direct democracy (my personal preference is a modified constitutional democracy) the president cannot veto anything, as he is only the head of the executive branch of government. kinda hard to do any damage when you have no legislative authority. of course, the same thing goes for the legislative branch in a real democracy.
    Unresponsive.

  7. #37
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Explain how it is that a majority of voters voted against GW Bush and D. Trump and yet they both slithered into the presidency to do grave damage to us?
    Because the President is elected by the states, not the people. The President does not represent the people; he represents the compact between the states and the states. There is no Article II power related to citizens.
    Thanks from OlGuy

  8. #38
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    in a direct democracy (my personal preference is a modified constitutional democracy) the president cannot veto anything, as he is only the head of the executive branch of government. kinda hard to do any damage when you have no legislative authority. of course, the same thing goes for the legislative branch in a real democracy.
    That would eliminate one of the most basic doctrines of the Constitution: checks and balances.
    Thanks from Babba

  9. #39
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    61,696
    Thanks
    19103

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Because the President is elected by the states, not the people. The President does not represent the people; he represents the compact between the states and the states. There is no Article II power related to citizens.
    That system was divised in the 1700's for a tiny country with very little communication and the Electoral College was meant to be a deliberative body to keep us safe from conmen like Trump.
    Think it's still ideal in 2018?

  10. #40
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    14,542
    Thanks
    5358

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    That would eliminate one of the most basic doctrines of the Constitution: checks and balances.
    in what way? there will still be the same three branches and they will still be independent of each other, with different duties to perform as they do now. but, in democracy, the citizen majority controls what the government does, not t5he legislature and the president.

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. shooting after argument
    By cable2 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22nd May 2016, 01:48 AM
  2. The Dependency Argument
    By labrea in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 22nd October 2015, 06:56 PM
  3. gun argument before the SC
    By PACE in forum Current Events
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 14th October 2015, 06:56 AM
  4. well...THAT'S a new argument...
    By Czernobog in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 19th November 2012, 08:24 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed