What is the better functioning "democractical" society, the U.S.A or the U.K?

Answer 1

"The English people believes itself to be free; it is gravely mistaken; it is free only during election of members of parliament; as soon as the members are elected, the people is enslaved; it is nothing. In the brief moment of its freedom, the English people makes such a use of that freedom that it deserves to lose it." http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau

Over the past decade, the same has become true, or almost true, in America: obedience to the party line in voting in Congress. So that the party in power, if it holds both houses of Congress and the White House, dictates law and its execution.

Answer 2

If you are suggesting democracy as in the separation of powers as a theory put forward by Montesquieu, then in terms of directly following the theory the US system allows the three powers to be far more separate. However this has led to absurdities such as a differing of the president and congress's political allegiances, which would be very unlikely in the UK and the two times it has happened has mean that the executive have very quickly broken down and needed replacement.
Recently Tony Blair has been moving towards greater separation by reducing the powers of the Lord Chancellor and making more of the legislature part of the elected. However the legislature is still subordinate the executive and there is not enough seperation for the judiciary although this does prevent them form making law rather than upholding it. There are faults in both systems but both societies seems to have produced strong democracies with effective means of ruling and answering to the people they serve and govern.

Answer 3

With the "Twins" of Tony Blair and Bush around, it's difficult to tell them apart, or the U.S.A. and Great Britain.

It used to be Great Britain with more social services.

Then again, Democracy is just a nice sounding word.

True democracy doesn't exist. People don't know their elected officials very well, and have no idea what they do when not being watched.

It's a scam on the public when they advertise to tell about opponents when in reality, they are all flawed.

Answer 4

The UK because its a system that has developed over 1000+ years. The UK system combines democratically elected ministers and the non elected lords. Which, whilst not entirely democratic, it works, and has educated people (Ie the lords, supposedly) to safeguard against the government. I know it sounds wierd, but suppose both houses were elected, and the majority vote labour into the commons, they are going to vote labour into power in the lords aswell. With that if labour wanted to pass some ultra hippy legislation, there is no safeguard, and defeats the purpose of having a second house. In honesty i'm not sure how the system works in america, but i think everythings elected, which in my opinion would/ does (im not sure if it does, im clueless on american law) contribute to this one sided legislation.

Answer 5

Neither...the U.K. has been following our political lead, politically equating democracy with capitalism, implementing the laws that best impact the Mega-Corprations, selling out the people's interests to the highest corporate bidders (regardless of country of origin), dumbing down the citizens, mis-labeling policies with ironically misleading words, and accusing citizens who dissent of being unpatriotic, though there's nothing to benefit THE PEOPLE going on in current policies.

We stopped being a DEMOCRACY quite some time ago. It is the LOBBYISTS...the largest CORPORATE contributors, that sway and decide policy in our country. This isn't conjecture. The grounds for our current political state have been laid, piece by piece, over the last 100 years...beginning with the creation of the FEDERAL RESERVE, the PRIVATELY-owned banking institution that CONTROLS our money, it's distribution and flow, and our credit. Everything is documented HISTORY. Sadly, most Americans just aren't paying attention. The news (increasingly), and our government, do their best to distract us from the REAL issues of our times...and Americans have become to lazy to care.

Answer 6

Well it's a bit socialist to have - government/tax paid healthcare. The U.S. may now be more of a corporate governed country than government, so I'd say that the US is less socialist - even though more than half of our tax dollars are spent on transfer payments. The UK has a royal family... yeah who's calling them democratic? Of course, they're basically just celebrities... right?

Answer 7

Niether

Answer 8

"democractical" ?
I guess you were trying to parody 'Dubya'

Given that both Dubya and Blair were elected on a minority of the vote, i would say that there's not much to choose between them

Answer 9

They're both equally as bad. We don't get to choose our head of state at all, but the stupid electoral college system of the US means that a popular vote means nothing anyway.

Answer 10

The once great country of Britian is going downhill fast because of its slow conversion to socialism.
In 20 years, all of Western Europe will be third world countries because of socialism.