User Tag List

First 234

Results 31 to 38 of 38

  1. #31
    Senior Member OWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    115

    Default

    I don't think attempts to control political speech through limits on contributions are morally justifiable.

    I do believe though, that if the Federal government were restricted to the specifically enumerated powers that the Constitution limits it to, that there would be no benefit to lobbying or attempting to buy influence with contributions.

  2. #32
    reflecting pool Typh0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK

    I think it escapes most people, that the 51% may vote to enslave, loot, imprison, or even murder the 49% in a democracy, and there are no inherent limitations to these abuses.
    Yeah, thats another point. Majority rule is not about the rule if what us right, as the majority may very well be wrong.

  3. #33
    Senior Member statuesquechica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFj
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Posts
    428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    Yeah, thats another point. Majority rule is not about the rule if what us right, as the majority may very well be wrong.
    That's a very valid point. Slavery at one point was legal and supported by the majority.

    I think any form of government can become perverse that's why the citizens have to be vigilant and hold the system accountable.

    @OrderOfTheCaelifera: no worries...I also have my moments of "steam escapement,"
    I've looked at life from both sides now
    From up and down and still somehow
    It's life's illusions I recall
    I really don't know life at all

    Joni Mitchell

  4. #34
    reflecting pool Typh0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    @statuesquechica

    Is corruption the exception or is it the rule? Also what is corrupt?Corruption is a hot button issue today, in countries like Turkey, Syria, Brazil, The Ukraine, Libya, Egypt, people have or have tried to overthrow their goverments, is this a sign thete is more of what we call corruptipn or is it merely that we're more aware of it nowadays because of social media and the internet?

  5. #35
    Senior Member statuesquechica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFj
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Posts
    428

    Default

    @Typh0n: Hmmm, those are all really good questions...and I think it depends on your view of humanity and people's principles in the way that question is answered.

    Answering for myself, I do tend to have a positive view of people until I am shown otherwise, and that has colored my view of the world. Perhaps it is naïve but I believe the majority of people start off with good intentions when they join the political arena but money/power/greed can affect people and organizations...or the structure/form of the government can lend itself to corruption, as I think it now does in the U.S. with the powerful lobbyists, individuals and corporations making policy now rather than the people.

    There is some research that indicates the parliamentary form of government is the most resistant to corruption and most capable of representing a diverse constituency. Food for thought...
    I've looked at life from both sides now
    From up and down and still somehow
    It's life's illusions I recall
    I really don't know life at all

    Joni Mitchell

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    There is nothing inherently good about majority-rule democracy.

    In fact, in the absence of an institutional restraint on the power of the majority to implement it's will, it can be the single most horrific form of government imaginable.

    In the United States, the restraint on the power of the democracy was supposed to be the notion of individual rights.

    Unfortunately, most people don't even understand what the word "rights" means... and the premise is nearly universally ignored.
    Most people are just extremely ignorant of history.

    The founders absolutely despised democracy, and in fact you will not find the word democracy cited in the constitution or declaration of independence

    1) The senate was originally designed to not be democratically available to the public (this changed with the 17th amendment)
    2) We still have the electoral college who in theory can ignore the will of voters or divide votes up as they fit (proportionally, or all or nothing, etc) further dividing the vote from the people
    3) Also very commonly noted, the US is a Republic which by definition is having a small number represent the masses
    4) The voter pool in the US was land ownership males who've never been enslaved, which less than 5% of the population in 1820 and less than 10% in 1830 voted in elections. It was entirely intended to function as a political nobility with grave and well spelt out restriction given to their ability to abuse the common man.

    Also I think quotes would be appropriate,

    A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%. — Thomas Jefferson
    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote! — Benjamin Franklin
    Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. — John Adams
    Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death. — James Madison
    We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy…it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny… — Alexander Hamilton
    The US was set up to be more like a secular monarchy with a political nobility class in lieu of Hereditary lineage.

    Also as shown with the 17th amendment which showed that when people have the ability to vote, senators stopped cycling out and gave rise to career politicians, or the progressive era, where people responding to very authoritative overtones to new deal, democracy and authoritarianism make crossroads with each other due to democracy obscured responsibility for consequences. A president can ignore a problem and it simply won't be his, or he can cause a problem that doesn't come into effect until after he is out of power, so the ability for anybody to pinpoint responsibility for said action is nearly impossible in a democracy, and with the inability to pinpoint fault, leaders cannot be held to the same level of culpability.

  7. #37
    Yup
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    Istj
    Posts
    1,516

    Default

    would`nt it need to start with each state revoking citizens united?
    "I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. "
    -Bruce Lee

  8. #38
    Senior Member tkae.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by statuesquechica View Post
    Scholar Behind Viral 'Oligarchy' Study Tells You What It Means

    I am a self-professed political junkie and was wondering if other people had heard about the recent political science study that indicates the U.S. has become a hybrid "oligarchy" rather than its perceived (and much romanticized) democracy. Though it is technically considered a republic, but I digress....

    I am in agreement with the findings of the study, though I don't find it to be a surprise that majority-rule is no longer in practice due to the influx of money and lobbyists into the political arena.

    Thoughts? And I promise to play nice if you disagree
    It is a republic lol

    a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
    We're only technically a representative democracy. We're actually a republic. We vote for electors who cast votes for a candidate rather than for the candidates themselves. After we elect the people we'd like to represent us, we have no control over their actions until the next election cycle. That's a representative democracy.

    The fact that our president has essentially equal ground as the representatives we democratically elected makes us a republic, even if the president is also democratically elected.

    In contrast, the UK or Germany would not be republics even though they're still representative democracies because they have prime ministers who oversee the parliamentary ministers rather than having presidential, autonomous powers.

    As to the article, this goes back to me agreeing with Stephen Colbert that, despite all of the negative implications, Donald Trump does demonstrate that the people still have and will use their power over the political establishment. The last time I've seen voters bitch slap the political establishment is when Eric Cantor got voted out of office in the prime of his career.

    I'm not worried about an oligarchy actually taking root. I think it's temporary. Money and political term durations are finite. The American political structure will continue to exist no matter what, and, just like the Robber Barons he cited, will outlive any inconvenient socioeconomic structures that define an age.
    "Not knowing how near the truth is, we seek it far away." -Ekaku Hakuin
    http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...psdunkqmep.png
    5w4 . IEI . Chaotic Good
    Right-Libertarian Minarchist

Similar Threads

  1. Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is No Longer a Democracy
    By Olm the Water King in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-25-2015, 05:49 AM
  2. Why I no longer believe in MBTI
    By murkrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 03-06-2011, 11:24 AM
  3. The Role of Law and the Idea of Majority Rules
    By ByMySword in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-29-2009, 07:01 PM
  4. No Longer Lurking
    By desiree in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 10:26 AM
  5. Despair no longer.
    By Soren in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-11-2008, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO