What's wrong with modern democracy?

Reinaert

Banned
Messages
763
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
Brabant
Ethnic group
Proto Celtic
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b1b2a2* SNP P312
Well, I write my ideas about it, and you can discuss about it.

I take The Netherlands as an example.

In most European countries we have a "one man, one vote" system.
Voting is secret, already from the beginning.
When people wanted to become "a member of parliament" in this system it was obvious to form parties that had an ideology that most of the members could agree with.
Those parties relied mostly on a party program.

But, the point is.. Members of Parliament (MP) are chosen on their personal merit.
MP's have to follow their oath, a promise to be honest, and take care of the prosperity of the nation.

But, the strange thing is, voting in the Parliament isn't secret.
So, parties learned to monitor what MP's did vote.
Any MP that goes against the party line can get serious problems
in his or her future (political or public) career.
Kind of.. "We monitored you, and if you continue to do so, you will never become governor!"

The second step was to influence the MP's by blackmailing them.
This is done by Party Whips.

Nowadays most parties have a small group of people who rule everything.
You can't call that a democracy.
A party congress is a farce. A kind of theater.

After the Party Whips the establishment invented the Spin Doctors.
Guys who train politicians in telling lies.

In that way democracy is as dead as a door nail.

---------------

We can restore democracy by making the voting in parliament secret.

It's as simple as that!

MP's can't be blackmailed by their parties anymore.
 
seems as you would like to have an honest political system...

however, "democracy" is tailored to satisfy everyone to extent possible, to give real power to those who have money and influence, and to give illusion of real power to the ordinary people. It was never meant to be real democracy.... besides, real democracy would not be efficient anyway.... same as communism failed...
 
from
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showth...ic-performance&p=374435&viewfull=1#post374435

I just wonder how much E have the arab rich countries and how much GDP per capita???????

like Libya who's GDP is very big, but only few families that can have it,

you see it through media glasses...
truth is ordinary people of Lybia had pretty high living standard and solid infrastructure...

do you know what is the difference in Serbia (and ex-yugoslavia in general) before and after introducing political parties and so called "democracy"
(perhaps "democracy"should be differentiated from political system with multiple parties, as it seems that "democracy" is more than just political system with multiple political parties, as it also requests that ruling party is approved by corporate mass media of west countries)...

back to differences:

now, in great "democracy" one would need to work abroad whole life in order to hope to earn for decent apartment in own country, while before in bad "communism"he would get apartment from state in time when he needs it, and with number of rooms that fit situation of his family... also now one needs to pay (either legally to private institutions or through corruption that did not exist 20 years ago) for decent healthcare or education... also, if we don't count painting town hall buildings, putting new lamp posts here and there, and exchanging pavement tiles on few places, ïnfrastructure is still the same as 30 years ago.... trains are even slower and much more dirty than they were... no new railroads although they are needed...lot of talk about new roads, lot of work starting, tv openings of small sections, especially before every elections in last 20 years, but essentially no new usable road was made in last 20 years...


though the TV show called "news" is now extended with more roles and dynamicity but with badly written scenario that has focus on display of lot of retarded egoistic clowns called politicians...

that is what one gets from "democracy".... and a question how come there is at least one solid apartment difference in value of ones work in bad terrible "communism" and in good, great "democracy"...where does the difference go? is it the price paid to watch that stupid soap opera with dozens of smart-ass clowns? who needs that charade anyway? clearly elite rules in both systems... so, why would a normal ordinary citizen exchange good living standard for an illusion of participating in running the state?
 
DEmocracy is after the Greek word δημοκρατια,

to understand what is democracy we must search in the history of ancient political systems,

Reinaert is correct,

that we have now is caricature of ancient systems,

just imagine that in no modern democratic country exist the ostracism,

i wiil write about that later as I believe that democracy means and how was done in ancient times,
 
that we have now is caricature of ancient systems

Maybe I confuse something, but is not it that ancient Greece had only 1/10 of population with voting right?
 
Maybe I confuse something, but is not it that ancient Greece had only 1/10 of population with voting right?

It was the city state of Athens who introduced the first democratic system about 507BC. All citizens were eligible to speak and vote, however only the men (who were also born of Athenians) were considered Athenian citizens. Excluded were women, slaves, foreigners and Athenian males under 20yrs of age.
 
It was the city state of Athens who introduced the first democratic system about 507BC. All citizens were eligible to speak and vote, however only the men (who were also born of Athenians) were considered Athenian citizens. Excluded were women, slaves, foreigners and Athenian males under 20yrs of age.

the case of man is correct
except Makedonia
but the system is not after atheneans but after Dorians, simply Atheneans make it more human and more correct,
also we have the Paros system and some islands system which tottaly different,

gods it is early and I need hours to write down.

simply to avoid corruption only citizens vote.
 
Ok, thank you iapetoc & Antigone
 
What is realy wrong with democratie is that you need qualification to clean toillet , but you dont need any qualification to rule the state , except bunch of people vote for you . In old times Kings were teached to rule since they were childs novadays politicians dont know nothing about art of ruling. Second right to be voted is aplied to everybody just nominaly , because nobody will vote you unless you have suport from rich who will finance your campain - if you won voters to hier for you you will need billboards , comercials in TV , newspapers , posters - and that cost money . In this kind of sistem it is posible for richest to finance all political parties and become litoraly untouchable . Even to pull the strings behind curtain and force state goverment to work in his interes , and not in interes of state- wich is common in many states in Europe , especialy East.
 
There is no choice; the policies of the major parties are basically the same.
 
There is no choice; the policies of the major parties are basically the same.
Exactly ! Aristotelus said every democratie finish turning in to dictatorship .
 
Democracy has failed Europe for a number of reasons, starting with corruption and tyranny of the minorities, but only to some extent. The figures of abstention in the last 30 years are appalling. When to vote becomes something the majority of citizens see as a burden they don't even bother to carry out (in some cases, over 50% of abstention has been registered in France, for exemple), why insisting on keeping a democratic process that is unsuitable to modern politics and obviously not a priority for citizens? On another hand, recent history has proved that protest vote has a bright future. We live indeed in very interesting times...
 

This thread has been viewed 14880 times.

Back
Top