Democracy: It's Not For Anyone - Greg Craven

[wdh1550]

maybe the kid that sokt that gays coke was ower age. democratie is wen the catholics do not rulles the world!

[julianmck]

Idiots! There are no laws except don't harm others and don't mess with contracts. Statutory law is when you are a ward of the state or an employee of the company Australia. Check the Magna Carta for a start. You all don't understand what a strawman is in legalese do you???

[WitchesHallow]

lol, too funny!

[MindCBase]

What a clown.

[CosmosPrivateer]

How about we try no government?

Maybe some Intelligent Anarchy.

[Aaberg123]

Hehe. "Anarchy is what you make it" ~ Wendt (perhaps meant on a interstate level, but who will notice :] )

[blackiron60]

Well that was mildly amusing.

[mistaspot1]

Direct democracy > representative democracy

[diotecktec2]

Not really... most countries are full of dumbasses, and those dumbasses out weigh the intelligent people.... This is the case in the U.S. :)

[mistaspot1]

Doesn't matter. Freedom trumps everything.

[Aaberg123]

"Doesn't matter. Freedom trumps everything".

And you think direct democracy is the way to increase your freedoms?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!

[mistaspot1]

Yes, the initiative is actually what ended the poll tax. It's what is giving Californians the right to smoke marijuana. It's being used for animal rights. It's what helped give women the right to vote for Christ's sake. Of course it's the way to increase freedoms. But that's not even what I meant. I meant that direct democracy *is* freedom.

[Aaberg123]

Ahh yes, the freedom to, as a minority, be completely disregarded by the majority.

Direct democracy is freedom for the majority, a dictatorship for the minority.

What I'm proposing is consensus-based, proportional representation.

(You really have to back your "Voting women" argument, because the exact opposite was true in Switzerland, and it's intuitively illogical).

A main tenet of modern democracies is the protection of minorities. How will your system avoid discrimination and exploitation?

[liber8me]

while i agree with you that direct democracy is a bad thing i disagree with the idea that the internet could be a way to use direct democracy. the problem is that using electronic voting you make it easy for a group or even a skilled individual to alter votes in an election deciding but undetectable way.

[Aaberg123]

Assuming that no tampering occurs, the logistics of a direct democracy are manageable with the internet.

Switzerland have (or had; need to check up on this) to a large degree direct democracy. A country where women were first allowed to vote in 1971! Take a wild guess as to what halted the progress.

(By contrast, Denmark 1915, United States 1920).

I really like to know where Mistaspot have gotten this notion of the source of womens right to vote from.

[liber8me]

i know, but you see therein lies the problem - you have to assume that no tampering has occurred. if a political party gets angry and starts accusing someone of tampering with the results it is incredibly difficult to prove that it hasnt and thus it will undermine the democracy since people will lose faith in it.

[Aaberg123]

The point is, that I wasn't really concerning myself with the implementation of the system, as I find that to be a secondary issue; but instead of the logistics with direct democracy.

Your grievances with the election system applies to all forms of election, not just direct democracy.

[liber8me]

yes, that's true I don't think voting via the internet is a very good idea in all forms of elections, but I was making this point in regards to direct democracy since voting over the internet is the only feasible way it could be done in the modern world.

[acr08807]

When you consider the leaders we've elected in the United States since 1920, you have to conclude that it's time to take the vote back away from the women.

[Aaberg123]

Nah, if people would only uphold the constitution, I'd be happy. The religious nutters doesn't seem to understand the words in the 1st amendment, but G.W. Bush didn't seem to understand any of it... at all.

[ArcaneKarma]

Direct democracy is the enemy of freedom.

[mistaspot1]

Direct democracy is a natural right. By freedom you mean capitalism. If your ideology takes subjugation to be maintained, then it is unjust and dictatorial.

[ArcaneKarma]

Capitalism is neither here nor there. The rights of man should not be contingent on their acceptance by the masses.

[mistaspot1]

Why would you think they would be? It's called the Supreme Court. It's there for just that reason.

[liber8me]

direct democracy? doesn't work too well in modern society when there are too many people. we're not in athens anymore mate, you can't cram all the men into the town square to vote on everything.

[Aaberg123]

The thing is, with the internet, you almost can.

However, is that really what we want? The majority of a nation would have a field day with any minority. The left-handed wouldn't stand a chance! In this case, I agree with Edmund Burke that democracy is shameless. But then again, his sense of democracy seems to that of direct one.

Freedom of speech would probably be the first to be infringed upon: "No, you cannot oppose the majority!"

As I said: Direct democracy = majority dictatorship.

[mistaspot1]

It's working already. Fail.

[adeadlysniper]

Maybe. Let's take a vote on it. Oh wait nevermind it doesn't work like that.

[Aaberg123]

Direct democracy = majority dictatorship. Read books beyond those of Nozick.

[ArcaneKarma]

It's scary that so many people are so quick to embrace direct democracy. It's another counter-enlightenment moment, no more noble than royalism.

[mistaspot1]

It's not scary if you're not a reptilian-minded reactionary who's got Stockholm syndrome in regards to our corrupt politicians. Not all countries have parliaments. In America, our system is broken. De-centralization of authority is not counter-Enlightenment. It's Enlightenment. What you're proposing is minority rule. That's counter-Enlightenment... Wake up.

[liber8me]

direct democracy is working already? really? tell me one nation that has gotten it to work.

[mistaspot1]

It's been working in Switzerland for 700 years. It's also working in the Republic of the Philippines, and in Uraguay. It's also working in the United States. We have it on the city and state levels already.

[liber8me]

really? so everyone in america and switzerland votes on all the laws that get passed? that is direct democracy. anything else is representative.

[mistaspot1]

You're being irrational. Direct democracy is simply when a group of people (however big or small) vote on an initiative or referendum, or when they recall a politician. It doesn't surprise me that I'm talking to someone who doesn't know the first thing about direct democracy. Most people don't. Yet, that doesn't stop them from having an opinion about it. Representative and direct democracy exist alongside each other. It's not a case of one or the other. You can have both. And we *do* have both.

[liber8me]

actually just so you know there are a lot of people who support different models of direct democracy. you think your ideas are the only ones? there are people who believe in direct democracy for everything, and there are people in believe in direct democracy once in a blue moon when decided something very important.

[mistaspot1]

I have.

[mistaspot1]

Democracy of any kind is majority dictatorship. Insofar as the majority decides. The Supreme Court is there to protect minority rights.

[BrainBuggered]

Since only the ancient Greeks ever practiced democracy, I suppose this only speaks to them.

[alleynz]

maybe we shouldnt blame democracy. Maybe we should blame the money system in general. its easy to make some cash and pay a politician to get your own way.

[TheFortressMaximus]

I think the environment and resources will eventually lead to a new form of Government, and information tech will probably become the next big way of delivering services to people.

[freesk8]

God is a dictator.

Communism is a religion.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

All three are not the good.

What is good is the defense of our equal, individual rights to life, liberty and property.

Not democracy and the tyranny of the majority.

Not religious superstition.

Not the cult of the omnipotent state.

This talk is hilarious because his subjects are so easily lampooned.

[phicubed]

Its satirical people. Relax. Have a laugh. It's all in good fun.

[TheFortressMaximus]

Seriously? Okay then. I seriously don't mind criticism of Democracy, in fact I'm quite positive it will one day fall out of favor to another newer form of Government. I'd actually stubbled upon this video looking for just that; a criticism of Democracy, but I wasn't impressed with what he had to say...which makes sense if he was being satirical.

[TheFortressMaximus]

I fail to see his point, especially when he goes off on it's leaders. Okay, maybe the current flock is not to his liking, I'll take that criticism. However does he forget that Democracy produced John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Robert Kennedy, and I haven't even left the 20th century. Those men were clearly men of excellence, far better than most leaders produced by other systems. Democracy may be second best one day, but for now, it is what works.

[CosmosPrivateer]

So when did America change from a Republic to a Democracy?

[TheFortressMaximus]

Well does he mean Democracy the philosophy. or Democracy the reality? America is a Democracy. You can say "well it's a Republic" or it's a "Representative Democracy", but it's understood that this is a real world application of Democracy, just like the USSR is real world Communism. Yes I realize the discourses on Democracy and Communism are night and day when compared to their real world counterparts. He seems to specifically imply here that he's talking about the real world, not philosophy.

[TheFortressMaximus]

If you wish to challenge what I just said. Simply "wiki" Democracy and see what it says. Normally I don't reccommend wikipedia, but for definitions, it works fine. And yes Republicanism is a form of Democracy, no it is not the only form of Democracy practiced in the United States. On top of this you can have multiple forms of Democracy...hell the speaker even talks about America in the speech.

[RemiG2006]

Good question!

;)

[freesk8]

It changed the moment a critical mass of Americans lost either their value or their understanding of the Constitution.

Govt controlled education was the main cause of that change in values and that lack of understanding.

[MrMP81]

I fail to see how it works?

The Economy in the U.S. - Collapsing - Current Depression

2 Wars currently raging, Occupation of over 170 countries around the world ( This policy costs the American Taxpayer over a trillion dollars a year )

An Income Tax ( Which forces the individual to pay for government programs, primarily welfare but in reality it's paying the interest on the loans the govt. takes out from the Federal Reserve )

[MrMP81]

And to add to it:

Thousands of laws have been established, that contradict what the Constitution has put forth.

All in the name of Democracy.

The Founding Fathers of the U.S. actually saw Democracy as the worst form of government, why? Because it's mob rule. Tomorrow if a number of people want to go against another group, it can happen with enough numbers.

As a Republic, the Constitution ( Law Of The Land ) Restricts such things from happening.

[MrMP81]

Oh, I forgot to rebutle the presidents you mentioned.

JFK - Almost got the U.S. blown up ( You forget the Cuban Missile Crisis? )

Franklin Rosevelt brought a depression onto the U.S. ( that began as a recession with Hoover )

Woodrow Wilson sold out the United States people to the Banks ( Enacting The Federal Reserve Act )

Name some more... : )

[TheFortressMaximus]

Those are all very curt responses that to me show me you only know basic talking points on those men, their politics and their acheivements. Kennedy saved us number one, and he was and always will be that centuries greatest hero. As for 'how it's working'. Yes the problems you highlighted are lamentable, especially to the victims. Bill Clinton does a great job putting our current situation in perspective.

[TheFortressMaximus]

Basically, you've typed your pedantic, solipcistic little rant on a computer, yes? Were that computer taken from you, you would probably be very dismayed by your loss of access. There is a certain standard you've come to expect in this country, that your parents, their parents and those before them didn't get to expect. Monarchies had a waffling effect where you could take giant leaps backwards in progress.

[TheFortressMaximus]

Say a particularly imbred leader took power, rolled back all reforms with a stroke of a pen. With that your parents suddenly were better off than you. Our progress is not simply owed to capitalism. In no other country have slaves become Presidents. So yes, we've made an immense amount of progress. Will it always be the end all be all; I sincerely doubt it. For the moment it enjoys high status, but if you think you can do it better start your own country...let me know how it goes.

[freesk8]

Well said.

[CosmosPrivateer]

Democracy is rule of the majority so majority rules.

A Republic ALL must agree. If it was this way we would have very few laws.

Thats OK by me.

This is a great video.

[ArcaneKarma]

that's just not true. In Republics we elect our leaders.

[CosmosPrivateer]

Youre correct; I forgot who actually elects these people.

The Media, Corporations and some well oiled electronic voting machines.

[RadarKat73080]

Pure democracy, governancy by the people, works best in small doses. KInda hard to get everyone to agree on something that only benefits a few.

[dunndudebemelol]

is this a joke? i dunno...

[suzhouhe]

It's not a joke. The "laughing" sound you hear from the audience is actually moaning at the misery of the human condition. They probably screwed up the audio or something.

[dunndudebemelol]

Democracy is not democratic

[AVTPro]

You are the only one who could respond to this guy in like humor.