Is it just me, or does anyone else get sick of having conversations with people that know nothing about society/politics? I mean, I certainly do not favor any side, and I may be wrong, but I have some idea about what is going on. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Not really. I assume that if someone's having a conversation with me about politics and i know more about the subject at hand than them, then they are usually out to learn something. On the other hand, sometime's i'm the one looking to learn. That's why it doesn't bug me.
I have just given up arguing person to person with those who I perceive to nothing about politics , history etc . I cant be bothered , if they believe in something opposed to what I believe then thats all well and fine by me . I stopped years ago trying to convince people we dont live in a democracy , as the saying goes "The best slaves are the ones who believe they are free" .
Not that I'm trying to argue but I'm curious how it is that you think you do not live in a democracy? I'm assuming you live in the States so that would be the non-democracy in question. I live in Canada so I assume your thinking does not apply to me. Are you just referring to direct democracy as opposed to representative democracy? Or the more basic argument of a republic versus a democracy?
Yes it does apply to you too. I'm not even going to bother looking it up but I would bet Canada is primarily a two party system like everywhere else in the western world. Who pays for the election campaigns of these policticians? Corporations make the rules. Democracy should mean directly not representatively, go anarchism Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I live down under , the democracy I am talking about is the supposed democracy the enlightened Western Civilsation has brought us in the West . What we have in effect is a plutocracy , which is a society run by the affluenent in their best interests . The goverments we vote in are just a powerless facade giving us a veneer of democracy , whilst the more powerful paralell goverment of financiers and industrialists direct society through the freemarket path .
America is actualy no longer strictly a representative democracy, as the number of "representatives" in the House of Representatives (The one branch of our government that is supposed to mimic the attitudes of the people) has been fixed for some time and will no longer grow with the population. With our growing population this means each representative represents more people each year, and naturaly does a worse job of it each year because he will nessisarily represent the majority or plurality within his constituancy. Our system is broken.
kazakhan - maybe you should have bothered. Canada does not have a two-party system. The main parties are Liberal, Progressive Conservative, New Democratic Party, Bloc Qebeqouis, one independant this year, and there's an up-and-comeing Green Party. You might want to bother looking up the rest of the western world, too. SpyMoose - Some numbers to back you up: Origionaly, the HoR had one rep per 30 000 persons with a minium of one per state. The number of reps hit 435 in 1910. After the 1920 census, there were some serious battles over appointment. The result of this was in 1929 the HoR voted to limit itself to the 435. Had the ratio remained, the House, as of 2000, would have had 9 400 members.
Maybe you should have bothered to read my post. I said primarily a two party system, I have now looked it up and I'm correct the last election in Canada was primarily between two parties (CPC & Liberals) just like the rest of the western world. The up-and-coming Greens didn't even win a seat.
Crimson: So whoever wins, the vast majority of the population are going to be pissed instead of about half?
Thank you for doing my research for me. Midterms are coming up and I despaired of doing another google search just to prove my assertion that America's representative democracy credentials are questionable.
If that's the case, being a slave pays very well. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
America really isn't a representative democracy either, we are a republic. We elect people who are supposably better informed to make our decisions for us. If we don't like the way they voted for us, we can remove them from office. That = Republic. Democracy in general has become a hijacked word that doesn't really mean what everyone says it means.
My dictionary says that a democracy is "Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives." That seems to match your definition of republic. Re political apathy, the common American is certainly paying the price for it. The Republican elite have wasted no time sucking up the money to be had from the fools. Bush is going on a 60-day junket to teach the Republicans that the stock market is secure for Social Security, and that massive borrowing on top of massive borrowing is wonderful.
I dont have anyone to argue about politics with it sucks Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I think it is sometimes bad to argue. But we shouldn't avoid social interaction and conversations because of that.
Moose - no worries matey. kazakhan - I did read your post and you're still wrong. The election was primarily between the Liberals, the NDP, the Bloc, and the PCs. Furthermore the election resulted in a minority government which matters significantly in a parliamentary government - in order to get any laws passed, the Liberal government must form alliances with other parties. Similarly, if the Conservatives want to defeat the government, they must form alliances. Neither party has enough power to do this by themselves. The other two parties, Bloc and NDP, have remarkable freedom in that they're neither the Queen's official opposition or the government - they may form alliances with backbenchers from both sides to pursue their own ends. Thus I present to you the multi party system we (and the majority of the western world) have. Look as Sweden's 6+ parties. Aside from all this, I’ve not even touched on the multitude of provincial parties. And on the greens: no, they didn't win a seat, but the number of green voters has increases, and therefore so has the party's funding (look up Canada's laws on small parties. These laws encourage a multi-party system). Clockwood - you would think so, but that's not what happens. Because we've got a minority government, the populace knows that if they fail to pass a vote in the House of Commons the government must call an election. Because of this threat the average minority government is willing to do popular things to stay in power, like form alliances with other parties or to reject missile defense (Martin supports it, but if the government supported it they'd fall because the majority of Canadians support it).
Crimson_Scribe: I've read your post and you still don't understand... Ooo, look at all the registered parties Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
no, you don't understand parlimentry politics. The difference between the other registered parties in the states and in Canada (and the rest of the western world) is that ours hold power.
