The last to elections were fixed and the winner was fictitious. In order to be a free democratic society we are going to have to insure a free and honest election.
2006-08-30 07:21:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Negatives are expressed as applied to a subset of the society:
a) minority interests suffer: democracies operate to the voice of the majority, so the minority need or opinion on any issue usually suffers
b) cohesion against a common enemy: decision making and action is slower and more complex in a democratic society, and this becomes an Achilles heel against internal and external enemies who seek to magnify minor disagreements in order to fray the social and political fabric required to defeat national enemies
c) representative democracy does not always voice the opinion of the majority, and though in contrast to item 'a' above, at times the minority interest supercedes the majority interest, often due to representative funding sources (candidate's financial sponsors becoming more important than the voting electorate)
d) all voices are heard: negative because some voices are overtly subversive to the national interest, some voices cloud real issues and prevent action when most needed, and some voices are simply ludicrous, but all have a voice in democracy
For all the negatives, this is the most humane and life-affirming form of society, as Churchill states:
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
I would prefer democracy over any form of government history has known.
2006-08-30 14:17:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by rohannesian 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
a) Costs more compared with other forms of governments. Even with e-democracy it needs to cater for the minorities needs and a process of discussion-convincing that in less representative societies can be bypassed.
b) Not sure if can be generalised, but democracy implies elections or at least constant "challenges" from the people, and this probably tends to focus on short term issues rather than long term.
c) Probably would not be able to cope with a major disaster that implied the sacrifice of a significant part of the population (big war, a supervolcano, a meteorite). From a society perspective, democracy would be best for avoiding problems, but once there... not sure it can remain intact.
d) Not sure, but probably there might be decisions that have to be satisfied rather than optimised... because of the need to negotiate.
e) The fundament of democracy is that each one has a vote that has the same value than the rest. But this does not relate with your skills, your information or your stake in the outcome of the decision, so by not taking that into account it cannot optimise decisions. I guess the alternative may be worse.
2006-08-30 14:23:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by ilpadrino 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Negative characteristics include legalized discrimination and persecution of minorities, either by religion, race, or political opinion. The U.S. is a Republic, not a pure Democracy, mainly to prevent this sort of problem.
In response to the post above: Add to your list of minorities that are having more effect on the government than they should "Corporations" and "The Rich", please.
2006-08-30 14:13:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Aleksandr 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
In America is clear to see: Control of the masses through minroty interests (Cubans in Miami, Pro jewish Israeli lobby) that Hi-jacks governement policy. So money has robbed America of democracy and led into depraven chaos ruled by certain special interest.
Take the money out and people's votes might be heard again, but as now money talks, it buys votes through the media...
2006-08-30 14:11:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Michael C 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
In a true democratic society, one citizen one vote, there would be the possibility of mob rule, group think, influence peddling with not checks or balances, a bit of misinformation could create chaos
2006-08-30 14:09:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by roamin70 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
When too many people become sheep and don't investigate politicians before they vote, then whoever spends the most money on negative advertising will win.
Americans need to put some effort into their democracy. They need to read, and from more than one news source. They need to think instead of letting party leadership do it for them. They need to hold politicians responsible for their voting records. They need to ask themselves "Who will do the best job?" instead of "Who do I like the best?".
2006-08-30 14:12:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Queen of Cards 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Winston Churchill once said: "Democracy is the worst political system with the exception of all others." So... even if there are negative aspects, would you prefer any other?
2006-08-30 14:31:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is the armed sheep having it's say.
in other words true democracy would lead to the rule of the mob which is why the US does not have true democracy.
2006-08-30 14:10:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
minoritys can sometimes affect the majority even though the majority doesn't want something.
some examples (not flaming here folks)
Homosexuality
Religion
Race Relations
Patriotism
The envirionment.
In a dictatorship anyone who didn't agree with the
"government line" would simply dissapear in the night......
2006-08-30 14:09:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋