Recently there have been questions on Yahoo! about why everyone hates the President, why there has never been a woman or black President. etc. Yet ask a question about restricting the vote to those competent to use it and the same people get all protective about democracy. You can't have it both ways. I live in the UK, where only about 20% of the population voted Labour (the rest either voted for someone else whilst about 40% didn't vote at all), yet we have a Labour Government which, it seems, the vast majority of the British people detest. I suspect the same situation exists in the US. It begs the question - is democracy all it is cracked up to be?
2006-09-01 02:16:17 · 22 answers · asked by Essex Ron 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Democracy like communism is an ideal and in practice seems incapable of working.
All democratic countries work on the BOW system. i.e. The Best of The Worst!!!
What we all need is honest and dedicated people to stand for alection. Unfortunately even when the odd one does they are quickly converted by the party political machines and vested interests.
It is all a matter of posture - first they stand for election, then they take their seat, then thy lie throught their teeth!!!
2006-09-01 02:25:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, more than 20% of the people voted for the Labour Party in the UK in the 2005 parliamentary elections. Right now, I would not be surprised if the popularity is about that low however.
The reason for the poor translation of votes into representation is the electoral system in the U.S. and the UK. Both use single member districts with plurality voting (one rep per district who only needs to get more votes than any other single candidate). In these systems, the party that gets the largest percentage of votes tends to get a disproportionate boost in seats. It happened with the Conservative Party in the UK as well. The reason for this is that single member district systems with plurality voting tend to result in two party systems (ask the Liberal Democrats how often they win in this system). When you have 2 parties competing in a winner take all election, someone can win with 20 or 30% of the vote. In the more common situation where the winner gets between 40-60% of the vote, you still end up with a very large proportion of the population that did not vote for the candidate in question.
2006-09-01 16:31:11 · answer #2 · answered by Spork 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democracy is still the best system. It's sad that only 20% of the voters actually voted, but everyone had the choice to show up (or not) and nobody was forced to vote for candidates they didn't want (as some other countries carry their elections).
Sometimes - but not always - those who oppose their elected officials are far more vocal than those who support their representatives in government. I'd say that's another advantage of a free democracy.
2006-09-01 02:28:17 · answer #3 · answered by Ginbail © 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The problem with America is that no politican does what they say they will do when they get in office. Most are so trained to follow party lines, they cant think " what would benefit the people".
America has the freedom, bought and paid for in blood, to voice our dislikes and complain about anything we want too. Unfortunatly, common sense by people as well as politicans, got flushed many years ago. I know that if I want to buy something, I look in checking and savings and if I dont have the money, I dont buy it.
Government writes checks and has no money to back it up. They do this no matter what party, no matter who the Commander in Chief is.
If people would take their right to vote serious. Get off their butts and go vote in every election. When things go bad, write, call or send emails to those people in office and tell them, " you either fix it or we will fire you!!!" We would see change.
Politicans know that the best way to deal with the voter is to divide and conquer. We dont stand together in support of anything. We dont want to take the time to get involved. We depend on others to do it instead of a three minute phone call, an email or letter to a Senator, Representative or even the President.
I can see by your question, the UK has the same issues going on there. Until people stop being complacent, get off their backsides and do something to help themselves and their country, it wont change.
2006-09-01 04:05:50 · answer #4 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Many Americans find the government's message much more reassuring than the actual facts. The government's message is: "America is virtuous. Virtuous America was attacked by evil terrorists. America is protecting itself by going to war and overthrowing regimes that sponsor or give shelter to terrorists, erecting in their place democracies loyal to America."
Sugarcoated propaganda doesn't present Americans with the emotional and mental stress associated with the hard facts.
Emotional appeals to fear and to patriotism have led close to half of the population to accept unaccountable government in the name of "the war on terrorism." What a contradiction it is that so many Americans have been convinced that safety lies in the sacrifice of their civil liberties and accountable government.
Simple answer is many dont vote ...many are not educated enough to vote.
Democracy is what your told it is by cnn or fox and it can change day by day.some times 3 times a day if theres an election coming.
The sheeples like it this way and the administrations rather count on it staying this way .
2006-09-01 13:54:57 · answer #5 · answered by Bearable 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, we are not a democracy. We do not get to vote on anything other than who our "leaders" (officials, etc.) are. And we don't get to vote for ANYBODY, we have to vote - for the most part - for either a Democrat or Republican if we want our vote to count for anything. We also are fairly restricted in our everyday activity. Businesses cannot operate as they see fit, they have to worry about "discriminitaion", "sexual harrasment" and a host of other things that can be very manipulative.
The Ten Commandments cannot be displayed in public schools. Separation of Church and State was never intended to mean what the liberals have interpreted it as and our country was actually founded on a Christian belief.
The minority (not majority) is what rules our country now. We have to worry about conforming to THEM instead of the other way around. That is absolutely wrong!
You could almost call us a military state to some extent. More likely you could call us borderline socialist.
Most people complaining about Bush are complaining about things they have no knowledge of. Sure, he hasn't done the greatest job as President, but not in the way people are b!tching about. An example is that lady that was camped out waiting to see him because her son was killed. I hate to say it, but he was in the military. If she didn't want to take a chance that he could be killed serving his country (under whatever President happened to be in office) she should have disuaded him from joining. It's more her fault than Bush's. She's just a bitter woman trying to lay the blame on someone else.
The war in Iraq is not about oil (most people have NO idea where most of our oil comes from - a hint: it's not overseas). We are fighting a war on terrorism and we are winning it. We have not had another 9/11 and, hopefully, we never will. It will take much resolve and determination, however. A lot of people in this country aren't willing to admit that.
We need to disassociate ourselves with the U.N. and take care of things as WE see fit. Our security (or any decisions we make about anything else) should NEVER be left up to representatives from other nations. That would NEVER be in our best interests.
Taxation without representation? What's the difference between that and taxation WITH representation? We are taxed so heavily now it's unreal. There used to be no federal income tax and the government got by just fine.
Social programs are killing us. We need to do away with the majority (if not all) of them. Social Security was not supposed to be a sole source of income for old people - but that's what it has been turned into. Welfare is a huge joke. My father was a mail carrier for the U.S. Postal Service and a lot of welfare recipients were living better than we were and driving brand new Cadillacs. They just didn't want to work and were able to get away with it - all the while the government was supporting them, with OUR tax dollars. How pathetic!
Our government does need major revision, but it won't happen overnight and probably not at all without some fairly extreme action. The biggest problems we currently face are the liberal media and the liberal agenda. We are always supposed to be "politically correct". I'm not and never will be. That is just assenine.
I realize I'm jumping all around here and could go on endlessly so I'll end with this:
Bush is not the problem. Our governmental system and the liberal/socialist agenda are the problems. The people need to control the government, not the other way around. We should also be able to decide how our tax dollars are spent. The budget should never be out of balance.
2006-09-01 02:52:14 · answer #6 · answered by Jon K 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You answered your own question. If 40% of the population doesn't vote they are stuck with a government that they don't want and that doesn't care about them. All the government has to do is cater to the minority of voters who will be back to support tham at the polls again.
Even in the US politicians cater to the core voters and special interests that get them elected. Politics is like any bureacracy, once they start the issues become secondary to keeping the bureacracy alive. The people aren't as important as staying in power and getting reelected.
(Sorry, I'm usually not this cynical in the morning)
2006-09-01 02:37:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
In a democratic republic you can criticize the government, without being afraid, and can remove the leadership in elections. Not everyone is going to agree on the winner of an election. I wanted someone else besides Bush to win but my side lost, that's the way it goes sometime. People who lose always shout louder then the winner in politics.
Bush won with over 50% of the people who voted, people who don't vote don't count, and they shouldn't count, they must have thought that participation was to much trouble.
2006-09-01 02:28:10 · answer #8 · answered by Zen 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is no true democracy. We vote, but we are not truly represented. Even if you can find a politician that is ethical, sincere, and passionate about the issues and problems of the people he represents, it doesn't take long for him or her to become bogged down in the bureaucracy and corruption of the House and Senate. They look out for themselves, and their friends. They take our money and live like royalty, waste it on pet projects, and then take more. They don't understand the problems of the poor and middle class, because they don't have our problems, and helping us doesn't make them any richer, so why bother. The only good thing about our government, is that it's the best we have to choose from.
Also, about Bush, people just want someone to blame for everything, so they blame him. I don't think he's so bad--I've sure as hell seen a lot worse!
2006-09-01 02:28:09 · answer #9 · answered by TigerLilly 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Before you ask is democracy good,
CAN YOU NAME A BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT
I can't. I support the current president.. When Clinton was elected I was depressed and couldn't understand how so many people voted for him. (He never did receive 50% of the vote) But that never made me want to move to Canada or Europe. I have not yet seen a better form of government, it is not perfect but it is the best type there is to be found in this world.
2006-09-01 02:25:15 · answer #10 · answered by danzka2001 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋