Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-25 at 01:10:03
This is largely an opinion statement, and a philosophical wonderings topic.
A couple of weeks ago, a science teacher came into my Chemistry class and gleefully announced that Donald Rumsfeld had resigned. Regardless of whether this is good news or bad news, the majority reaction among my classmates was neither elation nor dismay. Instead, the prevailing opinion was confusion. "Who is Donald Rumsfeld?" asked at least three students. Thick with disgust, I thought, "These are the people that will be voting for our leaders in ten years?"
In the 18th century, during the Enlightenment, the period of awakening in natural and cultural philosophy, the beginnings of atheism, and the first examples of democratic republican government, the leading scholars often differentiated between "the people" and "the public". To an eighteenth century philosophe, "the public" was the respectable and growing group of educated middle- and upper-class citizens like themselves. Meanwhile, "the people" were the illiterate masses. The philosophes largely felt that the people were ignorant, foolish, and could not be trusted with anything.
Today, I get the feeling that this ignorant class exists in large part today in places like America. A broken education system passes people into moderately decent jobs without ever requiring them to develop any kind of higher thinking processes. People go into their lives easily swayed by whatever pretty-looking politician or self-proclaimed scientist has to say. They're probably more swayed by Britney Spears than Richard Feynman. They don't know Koizumi Junichiro from Hu Jintao. They don't understand what Medicare and Social Security do for them. They don't see taxes beyond money leaving their pocket.
I feel that this gullible, ignorant mass of people makes up an overwhelming majority of the voter base in America, and in a way I feel that democracy is broken because the people are sheep, trampling down better-thought opposition and they stampede toward whatever the latest big-profile media event happens to be. What most likely cost the Republicans Congress in 2006? Was it the Iraq war? The blatant corruption and gerrymandering that men like Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff have been engaging in? No, it was probably scandals like the Foley sex scandal. Scandals that involve the sexual preference of one man, and don't really affect the Republican party.
Because of this, I feel like the country is moving blindly and dangerously along, run by cutthroat politicians who play dangerous mudslinging games with large herds of sheep - the American people.
Thoughts?
A couple of weeks ago, a science teacher came into my Chemistry class and gleefully announced that Donald Rumsfeld had resigned. Regardless of whether this is good news or bad news, the majority reaction among my classmates was neither elation nor dismay. Instead, the prevailing opinion was confusion. "Who is Donald Rumsfeld?" asked at least three students. Thick with disgust, I thought, "These are the people that will be voting for our leaders in ten years?"
In the 18th century, during the Enlightenment, the period of awakening in natural and cultural philosophy, the beginnings of atheism, and the first examples of democratic republican government, the leading scholars often differentiated between "the people" and "the public". To an eighteenth century philosophe, "the public" was the respectable and growing group of educated middle- and upper-class citizens like themselves. Meanwhile, "the people" were the illiterate masses. The philosophes largely felt that the people were ignorant, foolish, and could not be trusted with anything.
Today, I get the feeling that this ignorant class exists in large part today in places like America. A broken education system passes people into moderately decent jobs without ever requiring them to develop any kind of higher thinking processes. People go into their lives easily swayed by whatever pretty-looking politician or self-proclaimed scientist has to say. They're probably more swayed by Britney Spears than Richard Feynman. They don't know Koizumi Junichiro from Hu Jintao. They don't understand what Medicare and Social Security do for them. They don't see taxes beyond money leaving their pocket.
I feel that this gullible, ignorant mass of people makes up an overwhelming majority of the voter base in America, and in a way I feel that democracy is broken because the people are sheep, trampling down better-thought opposition and they stampede toward whatever the latest big-profile media event happens to be. What most likely cost the Republicans Congress in 2006? Was it the Iraq war? The blatant corruption and gerrymandering that men like Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff have been engaging in? No, it was probably scandals like the Foley sex scandal. Scandals that involve the sexual preference of one man, and don't really affect the Republican party.
Because of this, I feel like the country is moving blindly and dangerously along, run by cutthroat politicians who play dangerous mudslinging games with large herds of sheep - the American people.
Thoughts?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-25 at 01:24:44
I do agree with you, that's what it boils down to now. I remember in 7th grade, we had a vote for who should be president, and suprisingly Al Sharpton won the vote. WHY? Because he's black, but I'm sure none of them even know who he is. I'm no expert, but I think you're right.
BTW, I think you're from California, so, how is Arlond S.(wartenznrenanger or however you spell it.) as governer... I sort of got the feeling the only reason he got voted in is because who he is =\
BTW, I think you're from California, so, how is Arlond S.(wartenznrenanger or however you spell it.) as governer... I sort of got the feeling the only reason he got voted in is because who he is =\
Report, edit, etc...Posted by mockdead on 2006-11-25 at 02:15:05
The Patriot Act and Military Commisions Act destroys the rights of Americans, and the rights of foreigners.
So yeah, we're screwed
So yeah, we're screwed
Report, edit, etc...Posted by WoAHorde2 on 2006-11-25 at 02:26:47
I must agree with you here. One reason I believe America is "failing" is because of the ignorance, and lazyness of the general youth(10-17). The kids in my class prefer to learn the lyrics to a song then pay attention to a lesson that will benefit them in the future.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-25 at 03:27:15
QUOTE
BTW, I think you're from California, so, how is Arlond S.(wartenznrenanger or however you spell it.) as governer... I sort of got the feeling the only reason he got voted in is because who he is =\
Quite true, but now that he's in office, he isn't such a bad governor after all
It's so refreshing to see someone that actually wants to make California a better place, not play politics with it. (Poor Arnold was so innocent when he pushed the special election)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-11-25 at 04:18:46
That was a good read, DTBK. What you're describing is European Liberalism around the time that Eric Hobsbawm called the 'Age of Revolutions.' Liberals (not the modern US variety) thought that only the educated and (more importantly) propertied classes should have a stake in government. They were mortally afraid of what would happen if people who did not own property gained power over government - they believed that the masses would try to redistribute property and wealth.
The problem today is not the desire of the masses to redistribute wealth, but the lack of desire of the masses to do anything at all.
The apathy of the people in many democratic societies is a difficult problem. Why has it come about though?
Democratic governments have done some great things. We now have nobody living below the bread-line; goods which would have been considered a luxury in the past are now cheaply available; means of entertainment have increased greatly and technology has advanced, making our lives much much easier than they would have been if we had lived, say, in the late 19th or early 20th centuries.
Perhaps this is the cause of the problem, however. The people are, on the whole, happy with the way things are. William Cobbett, a British Radical in the 19th century, said 'I defy you to agitate a fellow with a full stomach.' I don't think anything could ring more true. If the population has its basic needs met then they have nothing major to campaign for and political apathy sets in. GNP per capita is high and life is cheap. People may have issues, but they are unlikely to be issues shared by a great number of people.
I think that the 'big government' mentality of late has also triggered voter apathy. The state is so massive and fights so many of our battles for us that we once again don't have anything left to fight for - it's all been done before. People are a lot more cynical than they have been in the past, perhaps as a result of the incessant banging of the same drums by the mass media, and exposure of numerous scandals. As a result, they are less likely to commit to supporting an issue because they don't know if it's hiding an agenda or what the point is in supporting it anyway.
If we add to this the absorbing nature of modern entertainment (especially the computer and the games console), then we can see a trend of people becoming more insular and interested in what is close to them. If you've ever been asked to draw one of those diagrams with concentric circles and 'you' in the middle, and then progressive spheres beyond it, then you'll know what I mean when I say that I think people are less interested in the outer spheres.
One last reason is the dissolution of class in reality. Such terms as 'working class' and 'middle class' are no longer relevant, although they are still used as if they are. Class has ceased to exist one its original lines - there is no great divide between rich and poor now; instead we have a more gradual wealth 'pyramid.' This means that traditional 'class' conflict is meaningless and people have realised this, though probably subconsciously. In any case, it has made people less likely to vote by 'class.'
I'll sum up some of the reasons for voter apathy:
1. People's basic needs have been consistently met.
2. Society is libertarian to the point where people rarely cry out for freedom.
3. The media has caused people to become cynical and not sure what to support.
4. The nature of entertainment has made people retreat into their personal lives.
5. Class no longer exists, causing identity crises and the breakdown of traditional voting groups.
With all these problems, what can we do? What is to be done with democracy? I would suggest that it is, in its present state, moribund. I think we can see a move towards more authoritarian leadership in the West in the near future because nobody seems to care. Legislation such as the Patriot Act has already been passed in the US, and Identity Cards are likely to be introduced in the UK soon (although there is definite anger at it from the UK population, so voters do care about some things). If we are to maintain democracy then we need to reform the way that it works. Firstly, voters must be taught from a young age that the right to vote is important, although it should be neutral teaching (otherwise it would be undemocratic in itself). Secondly, I think people should be forced to vote and not just for candidates - they should be made to vote on every major issue put before government. People would be fined heavily for failing to vote without good reason, and face a jail sentence for repeat offences. There would be an 'abstain' option on issues, but the point is that people would have to go to the polling booth. I think that such a system of direct democracy would force voters to become more interested in politics.
Of course, we could just do away with democracy and let the government do what's best...
Or, we maintain it in its present state where only very controversial legislation will cause change of government.
The problem today is not the desire of the masses to redistribute wealth, but the lack of desire of the masses to do anything at all.
The apathy of the people in many democratic societies is a difficult problem. Why has it come about though?
Democratic governments have done some great things. We now have nobody living below the bread-line; goods which would have been considered a luxury in the past are now cheaply available; means of entertainment have increased greatly and technology has advanced, making our lives much much easier than they would have been if we had lived, say, in the late 19th or early 20th centuries.
Perhaps this is the cause of the problem, however. The people are, on the whole, happy with the way things are. William Cobbett, a British Radical in the 19th century, said 'I defy you to agitate a fellow with a full stomach.' I don't think anything could ring more true. If the population has its basic needs met then they have nothing major to campaign for and political apathy sets in. GNP per capita is high and life is cheap. People may have issues, but they are unlikely to be issues shared by a great number of people.
I think that the 'big government' mentality of late has also triggered voter apathy. The state is so massive and fights so many of our battles for us that we once again don't have anything left to fight for - it's all been done before. People are a lot more cynical than they have been in the past, perhaps as a result of the incessant banging of the same drums by the mass media, and exposure of numerous scandals. As a result, they are less likely to commit to supporting an issue because they don't know if it's hiding an agenda or what the point is in supporting it anyway.
If we add to this the absorbing nature of modern entertainment (especially the computer and the games console), then we can see a trend of people becoming more insular and interested in what is close to them. If you've ever been asked to draw one of those diagrams with concentric circles and 'you' in the middle, and then progressive spheres beyond it, then you'll know what I mean when I say that I think people are less interested in the outer spheres.
One last reason is the dissolution of class in reality. Such terms as 'working class' and 'middle class' are no longer relevant, although they are still used as if they are. Class has ceased to exist one its original lines - there is no great divide between rich and poor now; instead we have a more gradual wealth 'pyramid.' This means that traditional 'class' conflict is meaningless and people have realised this, though probably subconsciously. In any case, it has made people less likely to vote by 'class.'
I'll sum up some of the reasons for voter apathy:
1. People's basic needs have been consistently met.
2. Society is libertarian to the point where people rarely cry out for freedom.
3. The media has caused people to become cynical and not sure what to support.
4. The nature of entertainment has made people retreat into their personal lives.
5. Class no longer exists, causing identity crises and the breakdown of traditional voting groups.
With all these problems, what can we do? What is to be done with democracy? I would suggest that it is, in its present state, moribund. I think we can see a move towards more authoritarian leadership in the West in the near future because nobody seems to care. Legislation such as the Patriot Act has already been passed in the US, and Identity Cards are likely to be introduced in the UK soon (although there is definite anger at it from the UK population, so voters do care about some things). If we are to maintain democracy then we need to reform the way that it works. Firstly, voters must be taught from a young age that the right to vote is important, although it should be neutral teaching (otherwise it would be undemocratic in itself). Secondly, I think people should be forced to vote and not just for candidates - they should be made to vote on every major issue put before government. People would be fined heavily for failing to vote without good reason, and face a jail sentence for repeat offences. There would be an 'abstain' option on issues, but the point is that people would have to go to the polling booth. I think that such a system of direct democracy would force voters to become more interested in politics.
Of course, we could just do away with democracy and let the government do what's best...
Or, we maintain it in its present state where only very controversial legislation will cause change of government.Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-25 at 09:24:53
Care to run a campaign on parents to educate its child to vote and think well? Not everyone can be interested in politics. So it is a question of "what should we do?"
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-11-25 at 09:39:25
Will, for the cheap and available goods, don't you think that point was more a product of capitalism than democracy? I believe that the media is playing a lesser part in people's opinions (at least in the younger generation) now than it did a few decades ago, as we have had the advent of the internet to provide us with many sources of varying and often conflicting information. I don't think voting should be mandatory, because you can't make people care about something they don't care about to begin with. Wow, this is an extremely disjointed argument - I'm just trying to touch on some points you made. Anyway, I believe the United States has moved away from voting for how America should be run (state's rights, slavery, etc.) to social issues (gay marriage, stem cell research, etc.) which would require, in my opinion, deeper research into what exactly they mean.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-25 at 09:43:44
There's really not much anyone can do. Taking away power from the masses isn't going to make them happy And how many politicians even have a problem with this =\
Maybe they can make the requirements to vote a bit mor steep, I guess. Maybe make a test, if they don't do well on the test they can't vote? =\
And how many politicians even have a problem with this =\Maybe they can make the requirements to vote a bit mor steep, I guess. Maybe make a test, if they don't do well on the test they can't vote? =\
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-25 at 09:51:12
This would actually require more than numbers and signs. It requires logic between the campaign runners. Not some blatant unarguable opinionlike reasons to protest against the government.
On the other hand, people who are voting for people without real reason or without being informed even though they could be. That is just plain stupidity of the society we are in.
On the other hand, people who are voting for people without real reason or without being informed even though they could be. That is just plain stupidity of the society we are in.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-11-25 at 11:09:23
QUOTE(Felagund @ Nov 25 2006, 02:39 PM)
Will, for the cheap and available goods, don't you think that point was more a product of capitalism than democracy? I believe that the media is playing a lesser part in people's opinions (at least in the younger generation) now than it did a few decades ago, as we have had the advent of the internet to provide us with many sources of varying and often conflicting information. I don't think voting should be mandatory, because you can't make people care about something they don't care about to begin with. Wow, this is an extremely disjointed argument - I'm just trying to touch on some points you made. Anyway, I believe the United States has moved away from voting for how America should be run (state's rights, slavery, etc.) to social issues (gay marriage, stem cell research, etc.) which would require, in my opinion, deeper research into what exactly they mean.
[right][snapback]594595[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]594595[/snapback][/right]
I don't think it's a coincidence that Western democratic societies are all capitalist. I would argue that representative democracy is the child of capitalism. Obviously that's rather a broad statement and the real issue is much more complex than a pithy quote, but I'd need to do some serious research to even consider answering the question well.
If you're against mandatory voting (which I believe they have in some countries like Australia) then voter education is the only other solution in my opinion, apart from abolishing democracy altogether. Voting should be a privilege not a right - if you don't vote then it gets taken away. I don't actually condone this but I think the electorate needs to be shocked to spur them into action.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EcHo on 2006-11-25 at 11:29:54
There are bad times and good times in America. Right now, it is bad because we arent really caring about the internal part of the United States, but out of the country because of the Nuclear War between several countries. After Hurricane Katrina, they made a big deal about it for only 3 months and then it suddenly disappeared from the public and the news because most of the money is going to the military for the war in Iraq. This would probably lead to higher taxes for my generation. But, like the golden rule said. If you dont like it, then leave.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-25 at 11:34:59
I agree with DT_Battlekruser, and in fact I take it one step farther than he does: People in general aren't only too stupid and ignorant to vote for a good leader, the government makes them that way.
Think about it. A bad government has everything to gain from brainwashing people into blindly supporting them. To put it bluntly, they want 1984 to happen in real life. It's a vicious cycle; stupid, ignorant people vote for a bad government, and a bad government makes people dumber and more ignorant. From what I can tell, this is the real reason representative democracy fails, it falls into a self-reinforcing loop of bad governments and stupid people, which slowly leads towards 1984.
I'll also have to say I disagree with CaptainWill. In his list of five points, from what I can see, he got four of them wrong, as well as the initial sentence for a total of five wrong out of six.
0. The problem isn't voter apathy. If all the people who aren't voting went out and voted, chances are they'd elect the same old (and bad) parties anyway. Getting people to vote does us absolutely no good if they still vote for bad leaders. In a more general sense, this is one aspect of the fact that political freedoms are not a goal in themselves,.
1. This is only true in developed countries. As far as I know, in the rest of the world, more than one billion people have no access to safe drinking water, and another one billion people don't have sufficient nutrition. The world's problems extend well beyond the United States' problems.
Also, there's the problem of whether having one's basic needs fulfilled is really enough. Think about it: 10000 years ago, our farming methods and water purification and transportation systems were several times less efficient than they are now. And yet, according to some studies, cave men actually had more leisure time than we do. Why, in our technologically advanced civilization, are we still working 10 hours a day to feed ourselves? If the total product per person has gone way up...why hasn't the total work hours per person gone down? Oh, we can make all sorts of excuses about supporting technology and organizing ourselves and so on, but the fact is, our advancements have made us more efficient, because otherwise we wouldn't have used them. Having your basic needs fulfilled is not enough if you are getting an unfairly small portion of what you produce.
2. Libertarian? When patent and copyright laws still exist, we still have to wear clothes in public, homosexuals still can't marry and women still can't choose what to do with their own bodies? You've got to be joking.
3. On the contrary, in most cases the media is specifically geared towards making people support whatever the government is trying to do. It may not be readily obvious, but let's face it, it's true. We keep on hearing about these evil people staging a nudity rally outside some embassy, and these other evil people making use of copyrighted products, and still more evil people who crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. Do you ever hear about how ridiculous public 'decency' laws are, how ridiculous the concepts of copyrights and patents are, and even a word about the inside job theory of 9/11? Well, so far I haven't, anyway.
4. This one is correct.
5. What do you mean, class no longer exists? The government, and the rich, greedy, corrupt people, would love to have you believe this. On paper, no, class does not exist. But in reallity, let's face it, there are in fact rich, greedy, corrupt people, and the rest of us are paying for them to live lives of luxury they never honestly earned.
Think about it. A bad government has everything to gain from brainwashing people into blindly supporting them. To put it bluntly, they want 1984 to happen in real life. It's a vicious cycle; stupid, ignorant people vote for a bad government, and a bad government makes people dumber and more ignorant. From what I can tell, this is the real reason representative democracy fails, it falls into a self-reinforcing loop of bad governments and stupid people, which slowly leads towards 1984.
I'll also have to say I disagree with CaptainWill. In his list of five points, from what I can see, he got four of them wrong, as well as the initial sentence for a total of five wrong out of six.
QUOTE
I'll sum up some of the reasons for voter apathy:
1. People's basic needs have been consistently met.
2. Society is libertarian to the point where people rarely cry out for freedom.
3. The media has caused people to become cynical and not sure what to support.
4. The nature of entertainment has made people retreat into their personal lives.
5. Class no longer exists, causing identity crises and the breakdown of traditional voting groups.
1. People's basic needs have been consistently met.
2. Society is libertarian to the point where people rarely cry out for freedom.
3. The media has caused people to become cynical and not sure what to support.
4. The nature of entertainment has made people retreat into their personal lives.
5. Class no longer exists, causing identity crises and the breakdown of traditional voting groups.
0. The problem isn't voter apathy. If all the people who aren't voting went out and voted, chances are they'd elect the same old (and bad) parties anyway. Getting people to vote does us absolutely no good if they still vote for bad leaders. In a more general sense, this is one aspect of the fact that political freedoms are not a goal in themselves,.
1. This is only true in developed countries. As far as I know, in the rest of the world, more than one billion people have no access to safe drinking water, and another one billion people don't have sufficient nutrition. The world's problems extend well beyond the United States' problems.
Also, there's the problem of whether having one's basic needs fulfilled is really enough. Think about it: 10000 years ago, our farming methods and water purification and transportation systems were several times less efficient than they are now. And yet, according to some studies, cave men actually had more leisure time than we do. Why, in our technologically advanced civilization, are we still working 10 hours a day to feed ourselves? If the total product per person has gone way up...why hasn't the total work hours per person gone down? Oh, we can make all sorts of excuses about supporting technology and organizing ourselves and so on, but the fact is, our advancements have made us more efficient, because otherwise we wouldn't have used them. Having your basic needs fulfilled is not enough if you are getting an unfairly small portion of what you produce.
2. Libertarian? When patent and copyright laws still exist, we still have to wear clothes in public, homosexuals still can't marry and women still can't choose what to do with their own bodies? You've got to be joking.
3. On the contrary, in most cases the media is specifically geared towards making people support whatever the government is trying to do. It may not be readily obvious, but let's face it, it's true. We keep on hearing about these evil people staging a nudity rally outside some embassy, and these other evil people making use of copyrighted products, and still more evil people who crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. Do you ever hear about how ridiculous public 'decency' laws are, how ridiculous the concepts of copyrights and patents are, and even a word about the inside job theory of 9/11? Well, so far I haven't, anyway.
4. This one is correct.
5. What do you mean, class no longer exists? The government, and the rich, greedy, corrupt people, would love to have you believe this. On paper, no, class does not exist. But in reallity, let's face it, there are in fact rich, greedy, corrupt people, and the rest of us are paying for them to live lives of luxury they never honestly earned.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mini Moose 2707 on 2006-11-25 at 11:45:40
I'm going to present some of my points...
1. Not everyone has time for democracy. Not time to vote, but to actually know something about the people they vote for, other than the party lines. Remember back when we were hunter-gatherers, and then we suddenly started living together and got job specialization? It's like that, some of us have time to research issues and candidates, others don't.
2. You can't force people to participate. Some smart people have even found it better for them NOT to participate. A few smart people out there realize it's better to do things directly, relying on themselves rather than in mass movements, protests, and votes. They prefer live under the radar doing their own thing rather than dependant on the actions of others, who will likely keep doing what they do regardless of his joining in.
3. The US is getting way too HUGE for democracy. Suppose we have 100 million voters split on an issue that gets passed 51% to 49%. This means 49 million people disagree. That means, minorities can still be extremely huge, and democracy generally fails to represent them. Also, the hugeness of the system also means most people simply can't know a lot of things about all the candidates, unless it's his full-time job (ie, media, political analyst). That goes back to the job specialization I mentioned.
1. Not everyone has time for democracy. Not time to vote, but to actually know something about the people they vote for, other than the party lines. Remember back when we were hunter-gatherers, and then we suddenly started living together and got job specialization? It's like that, some of us have time to research issues and candidates, others don't.
2. You can't force people to participate. Some smart people have even found it better for them NOT to participate. A few smart people out there realize it's better to do things directly, relying on themselves rather than in mass movements, protests, and votes. They prefer live under the radar doing their own thing rather than dependant on the actions of others, who will likely keep doing what they do regardless of his joining in.
3. The US is getting way too HUGE for democracy. Suppose we have 100 million voters split on an issue that gets passed 51% to 49%. This means 49 million people disagree. That means, minorities can still be extremely huge, and democracy generally fails to represent them. Also, the hugeness of the system also means most people simply can't know a lot of things about all the candidates, unless it's his full-time job (ie, media, political analyst). That goes back to the job specialization I mentioned.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-25 at 11:57:43
If they don't know who and what they're voting for, other than their parties, they shouldn't vote, in my opinion
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-25 at 13:30:38
QUOTE
With all these problems, what can we do? What is to be done with democracy? I would suggest that it is, in its present state, moribund. I think we can see a move towards more authoritarian leadership in the West in the near future because nobody seems to care. Legislation such as the Patriot Act has already been passed in the US, and Identity Cards are likely to be introduced in the UK soon (although there is definite anger at it from the UK population, so voters do care about some things). If we are to maintain democracy then we need to reform the way that it works. Firstly, voters must be taught from a young age that the right to vote is important, although it should be neutral teaching (otherwise it would be undemocratic in itself). Secondly, I think people should be forced to vote and not just for candidates - they should be made to vote on every major issue put before government. People would be fined heavily for failing to vote without good reason, and face a jail sentence for repeat offences. There would be an 'abstain' option on issues, but the point is that people would have to go to the polling booth. I think that such a system of direct democracy would force voters to become more interested in politics.
I only fear that this will lead to rebellion, outrage, and anarchy. The United States was founded on principles of rebelling against tyranny, and even in their ignorance the masses haven't forgotten that. If the government starts noticeably stepping on people's toes rather than just writing their right to do so into laws, you're going to have an immediate and outraged reaction, somewhat similar to how people react when taxes are raised.
QUOTE(Felagund @ Nov 25 2006, 06:39 AM)
Will, for the cheap and available goods, don't you think that point was more a product of capitalism than democracy? I believe that the media is playing a lesser part in people's opinions (at least in the younger generation) now than it did a few decades ago, as we have had the advent of the internet to provide us with many sources of varying and often conflicting information. I don't think voting should be mandatory, because you can't make people care about something they don't care about to begin with. Wow, this is an extremely disjointed argument - I'm just trying to touch on some points you made. Anyway, I believe the United States has moved away from voting for how America should be run (state's rights, slavery, etc.) to social issues (gay marriage, stem cell research, etc.) which would require, in my opinion, deeper research into what exactly they mean.
[right][snapback]594595[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]594595[/snapback][/right]
It's not surprising; capitalism and democracy go hand in hand. After all, an authoritarian government is more likely to want to take a much greater role in business than a democratic one.
QUOTE(Deathawk @ Nov 25 2006, 08:57 AM)
If they don't know who and what they're voting for, other than their parties, they shouldn't vote, in my opinion
[right][snapback]594653[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]594653[/snapback][/right]
Can't stop them.
In a way I agree with green_meklar that it is a broken education system that rears an ignorant and undereducated population. However, I don't think that the government actually tries to do this; it just is a hopeless failure at fixing the education system. Bush didn't do much good to the school with the No Child Left Behind Act, but he didn't hurt them much either, and it was clear that he personally did care about the schools. The problem with American schools is the lawyer culture that has arisen in America - partly as a side effect of the fact that many people have lots more money now than they used to have. If a student is failed, or expelled, a lawyer pops up to represent the student's self-esteem. Every other year a crackpot scientific article is published alleging that while America students fail in comparison to, for example, Japanese students in any standardized measure of test, American students are "more creative", "under less pressure", and "have higher self-esteem". In summary, though the government isn't trying to make it that way, the education system is broken, and that broken, easy system is strongly supported by a subculture of people who like the bliss of an ignorant, easy life. After all, as Bacon said, ignorance is bliss.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-11-25 at 16:11:35
So if the democratic system in America is failing, then what shall we resort to? Communism? Anarchy? Or shall we go back to the age of Feudalism and Monarchy, where absolutely zero rights are given to people, no freedom to own property, no freedom to express or practice anything you want. I'm sure our country would do a hell lot better if we used something other than democracy.
And if the people here are stupid, then my what are we going to do? Shoot them all? Deport them to another country? Spend billions of dollars trying to make education stricter, thus making school not enjoyable but excruciating? When pollsters call people asking for opinions on issues (like which candidate you would most likely vote for), the best they're going to have is something called a snap opnion. That's where it's an opinion you formed right on the spot without actually thinking about it. So what are we going to do about it, really?
Oh that's right, our rights! We're being deprived of our daily rights everyday aren't we? So that means journalists and newsreporters are being controlled by the government and are not free to say whatever they desire to say? Oh and all the Churches, Synagogues, and temples here; are they being shut down by our Government? Is our government forcing religion/secularism upon us? Now what will happen if I get charged of a crime? Will I no longer have the right to go to court? I'm sure our country is seriously depriving us of all these rights as well as others, making life here impossible!
The only right we're being deprived of right now that'll affect me right now is the fact that I can no longer blatantly yell "BOMB" in an airport. Boo hoo, not being able to do such things is seriously going to make my life miserable.
In short, there's nothing we can do about it. female doging about it only makes matters worse ppl. Tell me, what exactly does female doging do? Should it somehow magically cure this country of every "problem?" Deal with it. There's much worse things happening right now, and I think I'll make a topic explaining some of them later on.
And if the people here are stupid, then my what are we going to do? Shoot them all? Deport them to another country? Spend billions of dollars trying to make education stricter, thus making school not enjoyable but excruciating? When pollsters call people asking for opinions on issues (like which candidate you would most likely vote for), the best they're going to have is something called a snap opnion. That's where it's an opinion you formed right on the spot without actually thinking about it. So what are we going to do about it, really?
Oh that's right, our rights! We're being deprived of our daily rights everyday aren't we? So that means journalists and newsreporters are being controlled by the government and are not free to say whatever they desire to say? Oh and all the Churches, Synagogues, and temples here; are they being shut down by our Government? Is our government forcing religion/secularism upon us? Now what will happen if I get charged of a crime? Will I no longer have the right to go to court? I'm sure our country is seriously depriving us of all these rights as well as others, making life here impossible!
The only right we're being deprived of right now that'll affect me right now is the fact that I can no longer blatantly yell "BOMB" in an airport. Boo hoo, not being able to do such things is seriously going to make my life miserable.
In short, there's nothing we can do about it. female doging about it only makes matters worse ppl. Tell me, what exactly does female doging do? Should it somehow magically cure this country of every "problem?" Deal with it. There's much worse things happening right now, and I think I'll make a topic explaining some of them later on.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-11-25 at 17:10:35
Give the people less control over who is in the government and more control over what the government does. Even out the powers between the three parts of government, making them almost identical in influence. That should do the trick.
At the very least, make sure that the people voting have an IQ over 30. Once-in-a-lifetime testing, interview, etc.
Better the education system. So school gets a little harder, I can take it. Those who can't shouldn't get decent jobs; knowing that you'll end up in the streets looking for garbage for sure if you drop out of high school will be a strong motivator. If you flunk school, you shouldn't be able to get back in with a letter from a lawyer saying 'it's ok lol'. Limit the political participation of anyone with a overall income below x - chances are they dropped out of high school.
Better educated people will make the world better. Spending money on pointless war means spending less money on the education system (the DoE is retarded, by the way.. they banned cell phones and iPod's using the justification that they can be used as weapons) means more crime and less educated and worthy voters and less scientific, medical breakthroughs.. you know the rest.
At the very least, make sure that the people voting have an IQ over 30. Once-in-a-lifetime testing, interview, etc.
Better the education system. So school gets a little harder, I can take it. Those who can't shouldn't get decent jobs; knowing that you'll end up in the streets looking for garbage for sure if you drop out of high school will be a strong motivator. If you flunk school, you shouldn't be able to get back in with a letter from a lawyer saying 'it's ok lol'. Limit the political participation of anyone with a overall income below x - chances are they dropped out of high school.
Better educated people will make the world better. Spending money on pointless war means spending less money on the education system (the DoE is retarded, by the way.. they banned cell phones and iPod's using the justification that they can be used as weapons) means more crime and less educated and worthy voters and less scientific, medical breakthroughs.. you know the rest.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Hofodomo on 2006-11-25 at 18:25:12
You have a point about some crazy things happening....
But that's probably won't add too much to the problem than there already is...the average voter turnout for a large election, at most, is usually 50%....not even half of the people who can vote do.
That said, it's likely the people who know nothing and don't care about current events are the ones that stay home instead of going to the polls.
The ones that are most likely to vote are the people with higher education and higher income...thus it's reasonable to assume they know more than the average Joe (which would be a lot more)
--But you're absolutely right....I remember the Bush Administration saying something a long time ago (concerning the Iraqi War) that they have to fight Saddam because he's "the second Hitler". And whaddaya know? Soon, the country hicks start repeating that they have to take out Saddam because he's "the second Hitler"...
--Another example is in one of my local newspapers, a question was asked of citizens: "what do you feel about the nation curbing freedom of expression in order to protect national security?"
One guy responded: "I disagree, because we need our 4th Amendment Rights".
WTF?!?!?
It's sad...my grandma in China probably knows some more about American politics than some of these people....but isn't the core of American democracy is that sh*t happens (and I mean bad sh*t), yet the system keeps on going? The cycle doesn't stop...so while we have people who know nothing about the country, there are still people who do.
So while it seems like we are in dog poop, I still believe that there's hope...eventually [spoken with a very dry tone]...
But that's probably won't add too much to the problem than there already is...the average voter turnout for a large election, at most, is usually 50%....not even half of the people who can vote do.
That said, it's likely the people who know nothing and don't care about current events are the ones that stay home instead of going to the polls.
The ones that are most likely to vote are the people with higher education and higher income...thus it's reasonable to assume they know more than the average Joe (which would be a lot more)
--But you're absolutely right....I remember the Bush Administration saying something a long time ago (concerning the Iraqi War) that they have to fight Saddam because he's "the second Hitler". And whaddaya know? Soon, the country hicks start repeating that they have to take out Saddam because he's "the second Hitler"...
--Another example is in one of my local newspapers, a question was asked of citizens: "what do you feel about the nation curbing freedom of expression in order to protect national security?"
One guy responded: "I disagree, because we need our 4th Amendment Rights".
WTF?!?!?
It's sad...my grandma in China probably knows some more about American politics than some of these people....but isn't the core of American democracy is that sh*t happens (and I mean bad sh*t), yet the system keeps on going? The cycle doesn't stop...so while we have people who know nothing about the country, there are still people who do.
So while it seems like we are in dog poop, I still believe that there's hope...eventually [spoken with a very dry tone]...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2006-11-25 at 20:24:39
The answer to why people are stupid is not as simple as you make it out to be. If your a candidate running for any position, would you really want anyone knowing everything about you? What if you killed puppies as a child or something? You wouldn't want that to resurface, even though that was far off in the past. They try to send out as many positive messages without sending any negative ones to the public, although it is hard to determine which is which. The outcome is campaigns that run more like advertisements for products, that tell you that they'll fix something, yet they don't say how.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-11-25 at 21:53:31
I think this ignorance comes from companies advertising their products. I have had this question in my head for awhile, "Do companies determine culture?"
American youth today is vastly different from youth, say, 60-80 years ago.
Think of how much you are bombarded with what is "cool"(advertising). It would make any teenager want that product more then to learn about who the secretary of defense.
I see every day that buying an ipod is very much more important then what is going on in Africa. But I also get the sense that these teens want to help the African people by simply throwing money (donations) at the situation, which we know has not worked in the past....
American youth today is vastly different from youth, say, 60-80 years ago.
Think of how much you are bombarded with what is "cool"(advertising). It would make any teenager want that product more then to learn about who the secretary of defense.
I see every day that buying an ipod is very much more important then what is going on in Africa. But I also get the sense that these teens want to help the African people by simply throwing money (donations) at the situation, which we know has not worked in the past....
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-25 at 22:09:01
Agreed, the mass media certainly isn't helping.
Ruling out all solutions to a problem doesn't make the problem go away.
No matter how much you female dog at me for female doging about the world's problems, they will not get better. Did I propose a solution? No. I am simply commenting on the existence of the problem, and purporting an apocalyptic lack of a solution does nothing to better the problem.
QUOTE(MillenniumArmy @ Nov 25 2006, 01:11 PM)
So if the democratic system in America is failing, then what shall we resort to? Communism? Anarchy? Or shall we go back to the age of Feudalism and Monarchy, where absolutely zero rights are given to people, no freedom to own property, no freedom to express or practice anything you want. I'm sure our country would do a hell lot better if we used something other than democracy.
And if the people here are stupid, then my what are we going to do? Shoot them all? Deport them to another country? Spend billions of dollars trying to make education stricter, thus making school not enjoyable but excruciating? When pollsters call people asking for opinions on issues (like which candidate you would most likely vote for), the best they're going to have is something called a snap opnion. That's where it's an opinion you formed right on the spot without actually thinking about it. So what are we going to do about it, really?
Oh that's right, our rights! We're being deprived of our daily rights everyday aren't we? So that means journalists and newsreporters are being controlled by the government and are not free to say whatever they desire to say? Oh and all the Churches, Synagogues, and temples here; are they being shut down by our Government? Is our government forcing religion/secularism upon us? Now what will happen if I get charged of a crime? Will I no longer have the right to go to court? I'm sure our country is seriously depriving us of all these rights as well as others, making life here impossible!
The only right we're being deprived of right now that'll affect me right now is the fact that I can no longer blatantly yell "BOMB" in an airport. Boo hoo, not being able to do such things is seriously going to make my life miserable.
In short, there's nothing we can do about it. female doging about it only makes matters worse ppl. Tell me, what exactly does female doging do? Should it somehow magically cure this country of every "problem?" Deal with it. There's much worse things happening right now, and I think I'll make a topic explaining some of them later on.
[right][snapback]594741[/snapback][/right]
And if the people here are stupid, then my what are we going to do? Shoot them all? Deport them to another country? Spend billions of dollars trying to make education stricter, thus making school not enjoyable but excruciating? When pollsters call people asking for opinions on issues (like which candidate you would most likely vote for), the best they're going to have is something called a snap opnion. That's where it's an opinion you formed right on the spot without actually thinking about it. So what are we going to do about it, really?
Oh that's right, our rights! We're being deprived of our daily rights everyday aren't we? So that means journalists and newsreporters are being controlled by the government and are not free to say whatever they desire to say? Oh and all the Churches, Synagogues, and temples here; are they being shut down by our Government? Is our government forcing religion/secularism upon us? Now what will happen if I get charged of a crime? Will I no longer have the right to go to court? I'm sure our country is seriously depriving us of all these rights as well as others, making life here impossible!
The only right we're being deprived of right now that'll affect me right now is the fact that I can no longer blatantly yell "BOMB" in an airport. Boo hoo, not being able to do such things is seriously going to make my life miserable.
In short, there's nothing we can do about it. female doging about it only makes matters worse ppl. Tell me, what exactly does female doging do? Should it somehow magically cure this country of every "problem?" Deal with it. There's much worse things happening right now, and I think I'll make a topic explaining some of them later on.
[right][snapback]594741[/snapback][/right]
Ruling out all solutions to a problem doesn't make the problem go away.
No matter how much you female dog at me for female doging about the world's problems, they will not get better. Did I propose a solution? No. I am simply commenting on the existence of the problem, and purporting an apocalyptic lack of a solution does nothing to better the problem.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Hofodomo on 2006-11-26 at 00:56:00
QUOTE
knowing everything about you?
"Who is Donald Rumsfeld?" is hardly "everything" about Donald Rumsfeld. It's a far, far, stretch to say the American public is as ignorant as DT_Battlekruser originally described, just because politicians want to hide their bad side...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-26 at 02:03:34
It's a good thing to promote "researching candidates when voting".
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-11-26 at 03:29:46
QUOTE(green_meklar @ Nov 25 2006, 04:34 PM)
I agree with DT_Battlekruser, and in fact I take it one step farther than he does: People in general aren't only too stupid and ignorant to vote for a good leader, the government makes them that way.
Think about it. A bad government has everything to gain from brainwashing people into blindly supporting them. To put it bluntly, they want 1984 to happen in real life. It's a vicious cycle; stupid, ignorant people vote for a bad government, and a bad government makes people dumber and more ignorant. From what I can tell, this is the real reason representative democracy fails, it falls into a self-reinforcing loop of bad governments and stupid people, which slowly leads towards 1984.
I'll also have to say I disagree with CaptainWill. In his list of five points, from what I can see, he got four of them wrong, as well as the initial sentence for a total of five wrong out of six.
0. The problem isn't voter apathy. If all the people who aren't voting went out and voted, chances are they'd elect the same old (and bad) parties anyway. Getting people to vote does us absolutely no good if they still vote for bad leaders. In a more general sense, this is one aspect of the fact that political freedoms are not a goal in themselves,.
1. This is only true in developed countries. As far as I know, in the rest of the world, more than one billion people have no access to safe drinking water, and another one billion people don't have sufficient nutrition. The world's problems extend well beyond the United States' problems.
Also, there's the problem of whether having one's basic needs fulfilled is really enough. Think about it: 10000 years ago, our farming methods and water purification and transportation systems were several times less efficient than they are now. And yet, according to some studies, cave men actually had more leisure time than we do. Why, in our technologically advanced civilization, are we still working 10 hours a day to feed ourselves? If the total product per person has gone way up...why hasn't the total work hours per person gone down? Oh, we can make all sorts of excuses about supporting technology and organizing ourselves and so on, but the fact is, our advancements have made us more efficient, because otherwise we wouldn't have used them. Having your basic needs fulfilled is not enough if you are getting an unfairly small portion of what you produce.
2. Libertarian? When patent and copyright laws still exist, we still have to wear clothes in public, homosexuals still can't marry and women still can't choose what to do with their own bodies? You've got to be joking.
3. On the contrary, in most cases the media is specifically geared towards making people support whatever the government is trying to do. It may not be readily obvious, but let's face it, it's true. We keep on hearing about these evil people staging a nudity rally outside some embassy, and these other evil people making use of copyrighted products, and still more evil people who crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. Do you ever hear about how ridiculous public 'decency' laws are, how ridiculous the concepts of copyrights and patents are, and even a word about the inside job theory of 9/11? Well, so far I haven't, anyway.
4. This one is correct.
5. What do you mean, class no longer exists? The government, and the rich, greedy, corrupt people, would love to have you believe this. On paper, no, class does not exist. But in reallity, let's face it, there are in fact rich, greedy, corrupt people, and the rest of us are paying for them to live lives of luxury they never honestly earned.
[right][snapback]594642[/snapback][/right]
Think about it. A bad government has everything to gain from brainwashing people into blindly supporting them. To put it bluntly, they want 1984 to happen in real life. It's a vicious cycle; stupid, ignorant people vote for a bad government, and a bad government makes people dumber and more ignorant. From what I can tell, this is the real reason representative democracy fails, it falls into a self-reinforcing loop of bad governments and stupid people, which slowly leads towards 1984.
I'll also have to say I disagree with CaptainWill. In his list of five points, from what I can see, he got four of them wrong, as well as the initial sentence for a total of five wrong out of six.
0. The problem isn't voter apathy. If all the people who aren't voting went out and voted, chances are they'd elect the same old (and bad) parties anyway. Getting people to vote does us absolutely no good if they still vote for bad leaders. In a more general sense, this is one aspect of the fact that political freedoms are not a goal in themselves,.
1. This is only true in developed countries. As far as I know, in the rest of the world, more than one billion people have no access to safe drinking water, and another one billion people don't have sufficient nutrition. The world's problems extend well beyond the United States' problems.
Also, there's the problem of whether having one's basic needs fulfilled is really enough. Think about it: 10000 years ago, our farming methods and water purification and transportation systems were several times less efficient than they are now. And yet, according to some studies, cave men actually had more leisure time than we do. Why, in our technologically advanced civilization, are we still working 10 hours a day to feed ourselves? If the total product per person has gone way up...why hasn't the total work hours per person gone down? Oh, we can make all sorts of excuses about supporting technology and organizing ourselves and so on, but the fact is, our advancements have made us more efficient, because otherwise we wouldn't have used them. Having your basic needs fulfilled is not enough if you are getting an unfairly small portion of what you produce.
2. Libertarian? When patent and copyright laws still exist, we still have to wear clothes in public, homosexuals still can't marry and women still can't choose what to do with their own bodies? You've got to be joking.
3. On the contrary, in most cases the media is specifically geared towards making people support whatever the government is trying to do. It may not be readily obvious, but let's face it, it's true. We keep on hearing about these evil people staging a nudity rally outside some embassy, and these other evil people making use of copyrighted products, and still more evil people who crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. Do you ever hear about how ridiculous public 'decency' laws are, how ridiculous the concepts of copyrights and patents are, and even a word about the inside job theory of 9/11? Well, so far I haven't, anyway.
4. This one is correct.
5. What do you mean, class no longer exists? The government, and the rich, greedy, corrupt people, would love to have you believe this. On paper, no, class does not exist. But in reallity, let's face it, there are in fact rich, greedy, corrupt people, and the rest of us are paying for them to live lives of luxury they never honestly earned.
[right][snapback]594642[/snapback][/right]
Either I wasn't clear enough in my original post or you didn't read all of it and briefly appraised my list of points. Also remember that I'm not American so not all of what I say will be true of the USA. I'm writing from my experience as a British Citizen.
0. Voter apathy is a problem because it means when, for example in the UK's last General Election, that the turnout was about 60% and 50% of them voted for the Labour party, that only 30% of the electorate voted the ruling party in. That's hardly a mandate to rule - you might as well just have an elite 'council' of citizens vote in the ruling party. I suppose you can argue that people have a right to have a say and a right not to exercise it, but I personally find it disturbing that so many people do not vote. I believe I can see why and I think democratic systems need reform.
1. I meant developed democratic societies (in particular the US and UK). Sorry for not making that clear. http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/ge05/turnout.htm
2. It might not be truly Libertarian, but it is far more so than it has been in the past. I don't see any mass movements for nudism, for example. Also, remember I'm from the UK, which is more Libertarian than the US. Gay 'marriage' doesn't feature here, but 'civil partnership' is the alternative which allows same-sex couples to have all the rights of a married couple.
3. I disagree - perhaps in the US it's like that, but not here. Besides, I'm sure that a biased media encourages voter cynicism anyway, unless the electorate is composed of morons (which is perhaps the problem).
4. Glad you agree - though I thought that was my weakest point. Maybe it's because we are both speaking from experience on that one.
5. Ok, I have to agree with you that there are still 'rich and poor,' but the traditional structure of things has changed. People don't really belong to a class anymore because there are only (excepting very small minorities) the super-rich elite and then a giant class of comfortably financed people of varying degrees of wealth and a variety of occupations. Again perhaps it is different from the US.