Why arent we truely democratic?

salami1212

salami1212

salami1212

Soldato
Joined
3 Jul 2005
Posts
3,027
Surely, if there was a system whereby everything stays the same except instead of politicians voting for the big changes etc there could be an online system where everyone in the country can vote. For the very few people who dont have internet capabilities then a simple letter could be sent out to them.And obviously each town would have certain issues relative to that area. Surely in this day and age it should be feasible?

That would be a true form of direct democracy.
 
And dangerous, minoritys need protecting, also people think about themselves. For example people would vote to slash tax, without thinking or understanding the effect.
 
AcidHell2 said:
And dangerous, minoritys need protecting, also people think about themselves. For example people would vote to slash tax, without thinking or understanding the effect.
Click to expand...

Truee, but there wouldnt be a vote saying "shall we chuck the asians out" but for example "shall we build the mosque" is fine.

and the tax issue is always a concern. Surely there are enough smart people to realise that slashing tax by too much would not be beneficial for the country. And even if tax was slashed then they would see the country getting significantly worse and in return would hopefully vote for tax to increase again. So after say 5-10 years there would be a sort of equilibrium effect of all laws.
 
It doesn't have to be race minority, any minority groups needs protecting whatever it is, be it a sport or anything else.

Just look how goverments have to pander to public opinion allready.

Democracy is a rubbish system, but it's just the best system we have.
 
Never heard of tyranny of the majority then salami?

A system where people vote on polices would be terrible, the lay person is not informed enough to understand the vote they would be making and we would have tyranny of the majority. The country is bad enough as it is with many laws being based on social acceptability and personal morals rather than harm.
 
Minorities are not minorities.

When people say minority they usually go purely by the demographics of a country. If we look at things on a global scale there are more of these minorities than us.

Immigration = genocide.
 
Because true democracies are mob rule, and mob rule is unacceptable.

Everyone hold minority views on something, and the vast majority of the electorate are irrational idiots who are easily led and often hold insane views with no bearing on reality. (see above poster for example)

I want these other people to have as little influence on my life as is possible.
 
salami1212 said:
Truee, but there wouldnt be a vote saying "shall we chuck the asians out" but for example "shall we build the mosque" is fine.

and the tax issue is always a concern. Surely there are enough smart people to realise that slashing tax by too much would not be beneficial for the country. And even if tax was slashed then they would see the country getting significantly worse and in return would hopefully vote for tax to increase again. So after say 5-10 years there would be a sort of equilibrium effect of all laws.
Click to expand...

Why couldn't there be a "throw all the X out"? That's not democratic. Who would police the votes? Who would police the people policing it to ensure we get to vote on the right things?

In addition, no, there are not enough smart people around to realise that you cant just slash all tax and spend all the money on whatever you like. Otherwise we wouldn't keep getting L.... no not going there.

Democracy is like freedom. They go hand in hand. If a country has democracy it is seen as it being a free country.

You can never have true democracy, like you can never have true freedom.

True democracy allows everyone to vote on everything, nothing would get done as most people will vote in their own interests. "The People" as a whole are bloody stupid. True freedom is the freedom to murder, rape, pillage and talk in the theatre without repercussion.

We don't want that.


Morbius said:
We'd all vote on it.
Click to expand...

And if 51% of people vote that we should have a vote. And then 51% of people vote that we should indeed "chuck out all the Asians" that makes it ok? How exactly would that happen?
 
Last edited:
Tyranny of the majority?

Extreme democracy would be like x factor for justice, its fair better to elect people and have them do a job then load the population with every decision and expect good governance.

It would just be unspecialised chaos instead as you get the distribution of responsibility within the crowd and no accumulation or depth of knowledge with which to judge the factors concerned
 
Darkstaruk said:
Minorities are not minorities.

When people say minority they usually go purely by the demographics of a country.
Click to expand...

How else? Minority and majority can only be defined against a given sample size. In this discussion it's the UK population. For example; United States citizens are a minority group in the United Kingdom. In the United States, they probably wouldn't be.

So minorities, in context of the discussion, actually are minorities.

:-/
 
Democracy doesn't literally mean making every single person makes every government decision, it would be a mess for so many reasons.

People vote to choose the government, it's far from perfect but what's better?
 
Last edited:
Morbius said:
We'd all vote on it.
Click to expand...

So we'll all vote on the decisions about what we vote on and then we'll all vote on what we've decided to vote on?

Will we have time to do anything but vote?

Will we grow apathetic about the system after the thousandth time of voting against a vote on whether candy floss should be given away for free on the NHS, or whatever other inane things have been proposed?

If you want to make better use of democracy, lobby your MP like you're supposed to. Of course, this assumes that your MP actually cares what his constituents think...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom