The composition of a nations population is growing increasingly complex. The composition of previous populations in history was relatively simplistic: Where nations were composed of populations with uniform religious, cultural, ideological and somewhat structured society and socioeconomic strata. Todays countries have wide variations of ideology and content within their populations many of which are in contradiction to one another. Government and power of position is then given to individuals who "seem" to represent the majority. However with increasingly complex structure is it not possible that there is no majority ? That the stastical differences between fractions are negligible ? That the election of a leadership from one fraction/ideology is as incorrect and unjust as an election from the myraid others. How than can a leadership be trusted to work for the benifit of all the diverse elements which constitute the population.?. Or does it persue it own agenda or self serving ends?
2007-03-26 03:05:35 · 5 answers · asked by Dr. R 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well, that is true and not true,
no other country in the West has as multicultural of a military and government as the USA,
and that's a fact.
However, where we are not so diverse is in political views,
there are no professed atheists in government or those who want to decriminalize soft drugs which the law causes more problems than the actual drug does,
etc.
we need more expression of diverse views in the USA which appropriately reflects the people...
'more third parties.
2007-03-26 03:09:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Eliminate the diversity and you won't have this problem. Why do people today (mostly liberals) see diversity as such a good thing? America worked best as the "melting pot" where immigrants left their cultures behind and accepted the identity of an AMERICAN. We are falling apart because everyone now wants their own version of America. Multi-culturalism is destructive by nature. It is not possible to keep a country together for long when everyone speaks a different language and wants a different direction.
2007-03-26 03:18:21 · answer #2 · answered by boonietech 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is very important and genuine question required to revisit the old definition of democracy that govt is of the people by the people and for the people and we shoulld think agaion how to practically achieve the goal
authority is meaningless in this pretext and required to be redefined Still the power to decided is manupulated again and again by cotery of vested interest
2007-03-26 03:26:12 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Could be that government is a way to give unemployable lay abouts a place to go to collect a check.
2007-03-26 03:12:33 · answer #4 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are right. You get a perverted democracy with forced unity in diversity.
2007-03-29 17:18:17 · answer #5 · answered by sensekonomikx 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋