Is Democracy The Perfect System?

[member 0]

Do all people support the system of democracy? Well basically Democracy means a system or government run by by the people for the people from the people.That means democracy supports the fact that people are always right.Now the question arises, Is it always true that people are always right? for example if a person X is not a thief and majority of people thinks that he is a thief.Then does that majority of people makes the truth false,i.e. we will have to think that person is a thief even if he is not a thief.Just because majority says, we will have to support the falsehood.And if Majority of people will be less intelligent then we will always have to supperess our feelings.And a decision of human being can never be perfect then how can we follow the wrong in order to get the Right? Please reply if some body have the answer.

[Thingcubed 0]

I don't believe there is a "perfect" system. I think some systems tend to work better than others, but in the end they all have their own issues. I'm not entirely sure if are even any true democracies in existence, or if there ever has been. For example, the USA, which is widely considered a "democracy" is in fact a Democratic Republic. In my opinion, a Republic is probably more effective than a Democracy, because the leaders of a Republic are not constrained by majority rule. They do have to listen to their constituents, and follow the will of the people to a degree, but they have the ability and (hopefully) the forethought to not be swayed by public opinion alone. Mob rule could easily be just as scary as autocratic rule.

[Vixen_Poetic 0]

A great philosopher once said (don't ask which I don't remember), "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others." The problem and grace of a true democracy is that it requires the constant involvement of it's citizens. That is great as long as enough people remain personally involved voluntarily, but when people become complacent... In the declining, decadant days of the greecian city states too many citizens were choosing to just get on with their personal lives and interests and some cities had to hire or assign groups of slaves to round up enough citizens to have the numbers neccesary for their forums to do the job of governing.

 

A true democracy has every citizen having the right, if not the responsibility, to vote on every issue, bill, and regulation to come up before the government. A republic appoints people to make those descisions for the nation. As a republic built on democratic principles we elect by democratic process the people who will make those descisions and have a regularly scheduled review process when we decide if we want them to continue doing the job or want someone else to try their hand at it for a while.

 

A "perfect" system would be a tyrany where every descision is made by a wise leader who has an in depth understanding of 'the big picture' and a similar understanding of human nature. It would take a perfect, uncorruptable person who also would need to be immortal, because his successor may not be perfect and uncorruptable. The worst form of government is a tyrany under a corrupt leader. Can anybody say 'Fidel Castro'? The list of tyrants who have caused terrible suffering among their own people is long, the democracies that have caused similar tragedies... is there one?

 

A true democracy would be possible in the near future with the advancing connectivity of technology, but would any citizenry want to be required to spend between one and four hours every day dealing with the day to day requirements, keeping up with the issues and voting on them, of governing?

[haberjj01 0]

I believe that a true democracy is very possible. Like Vixen Poetic said, technology will have the power to further this possibility. Today, what I see are people who are very burned out and complacent when it comes to the government. Everyday our elected leaders make decisions based on greed and back room agreements made with big company heads and lobbyists. What we need is to become more involved in our government as a people. It has become routine for us citizens to sit back and take everything our government gives us- good and bad. I firmly believe that a complete change in the social way of thinking towards our government and politicians is severely needed.By it's very nature, democracy involves a slow process to pass laws and make changes. However, we should never underestimate the power of people to make immediate changes if we come together. The fact is that if we all want something bad enough, they cannot ignore us. Remember, their jobs are in our hands.

Edited April 4, 2008 by haberjj01 (see edit history)

[rayzoredge 2]

A great philosopher once said (don't ask which I don't remember), "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others."

That's Socrates and Plato for ya.

 

Platonic/Socratic thinking on societies works upon the theory of the declination of society, beginning with a proper kingship and declining towards an oliogarchy, timocracy, democracy, and finally despotism. Since I'm currently taking a philosophy college course, I'm actually starting to agree more towards the writings of Plato and less supportive of democracy, but having been brought up with the ideas and concepts of equality, human rights, freedoms, and the strive for individual happiness for everyone, it's nearly impossible as I always take into account how everyone else would feel.

 

That's not how Plato and Socrates thought.

 

Democracy is one of the worst types of government that a society can have, simply because EVERYONE has a voice. If something is voted on and there isn't unanimous agreement, usually the idea is thrown out, even though it would be more beneficial than harmful. Just look at today's current state of the nation. We have sympathy and some of us object towards human cloning, yet it would be very beneficial for us to be able to test and experiment with clones to bring forth new discoveries and knowledge of humans to be able to cure and aid what hampers us as a species (disease, unwanted hereditary conditions, etc.). We don't like testing on animals or people because it's inhumane, but how would we know what is and is not good for us? We are for freedoms of religion, speech, and what-have-you, but doesn't it slow down or even stop the progression towards the common goal of advancement as mankind?

 

The best kind of government, according to Socratic/Platonic thought, would be a kingship, but this too has limits. For one, the leading authority HAS to have knowledge, know how to advance society as a whole, and not have any self-interest. (Ideally, the leading authority should be a philosopher, or a Philosopher King.) The efforts of the leading authority MUST be for the people, first and foremost. The people, in return, MUST tend to what they are skilled at to provide and contribute to the society, and mustn't meddle in the affairs of others (i.e. a priest shouldn't try forging iron because he or she wants to, a blacksmith shouldn't try fishing, a teacher shouldn't try farming, etc.). (This is known as the ontological division of labor.) Of course, in a perfect world, there wouldn't be any conflict, but since there is always the threat of war, Guardians (soldiers) must be established to protect the people. They should be cared for, fed, and given the basic needs, but they are not allowed to possess land or property. In this type of society, not everyone is going to be happy, but it is focused on the goal of happiness for the society AS A WHOLE.

 

Now, as for the original topic at hand: I agree and disagree with democracy, as you can probably see why with what I said above. There really should be a ruling authority that strives towards the advancement of the society as a whole, but we all know that power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and I really do wonder how a kingship would work for the United States. (I don't think it's possible unless there is a cleansing, as Plato would put it, of all people already influenced by the idea of equality and fairness so that it would be possible to start off of a clean slate and have no objection to the new idea of an incoming kingship.)

[KansukeKojima 0]

Well... there truly is no perfect system. I don't have any real problems with democracy, but personally I favor socialist ideals above all else, regardless of governmental form. I'd be fine with a democratic government that puts its peoples welfare above all else, and I would be fine with a communist/dictatorship that places its peoples welfare above all else.As I live in Canada, our country has a democratic system. I have found that this system does not work all to well, especially since people are becoming increasingly careless. What I mean by that is voter turn-out has steadily declined. More to my point though. I feel that the style of democracy in Canada is one of the least effective. Why? It is because decisions are made based on the opinion of the largest group. So:40% of population wanted one thing30% another20% another10% another40% gets what they want. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not the majority of the population, is it? Canada (and all other nations') democracies should function like this:60% of population wanted one thing30% another10% anotherDecisions should only be made in democracies if the majority of the entire population wants a change made.

[husker 0]

A great philosopher once said (don't ask which I don't remember), "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others."

Funny thing is that when I read this topic, I knew exactly the right quote for it. And you stole it lol. It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.

That's by Winston Churchill. I agree with him 100%.

[gaspe86 0]

The democratic system in my view is the system of haggling, a system where politicians falsely sell there soul to the voting public. In such a system it is not the most adequate politician that becomes elected but rather the best haggler. Sadly enough such a system allow for incompetent politician reach the power positions.

[arnz 0]

Democracy is a good thing, although I do tend to agree it isnt a full democracy. In many countries around the world, voters are pretty much given full rights on who to vote for to lead their nation for a set term. Thus leading to debates between candidates, and in most cases it ends up 1 v 1 with the winner usually the one that makes a convincing case, or "the best straggler" as many would say, since Politicians do tend to backflip on promises or suggestions and the like some time after they get elected in, thus the loss of faith in many politicians from people around the world.

[heavensounds 0]

Well, democracy is not the perfect system of course. That is obvious as there are so many problems with it all around the world. The problem though is not in the democracy itself but in people unable to live up to its standards! On the other hand, democracy allows a lot of freedom and at least on paper you have the right to express your opinion, gather with other people, create parties and so on. The problem of democracy is in its slow functionality as everything has to be voted and tested before being put to work - which prevents bad or self-centered actions at least on paper.So what can we do that government will work faster? As Plato once said, the best possible country and government would be the one of philosophers - people with the highest moral values, being on the spiritual path without any material property. They should be asked and begged to rule the country as they wouldn't get anything for it apart from the position. That could be the perfect system, but democracy certainly isn't.

[byronarnold 0]

Democracy is the hope that more than half the people are right more than half the time.

I have no idea who said it, but I learned it in government class...

Democracy is not perfect by any means. However it is the best that is currently available, imo.

Of course, many times minorities are SOL. But most modern democracies have safeguards to protect the minorities.

[jjaenagle 0]

to be honest, i really dont hink there is a perfect system! I like democracy because of the fact that it gives us all a choice, but to be honest, america has made some pretty stupid choices! Can you imagine if 51% of our country wanted to change something? That's still a huge number of people who didn't want to change something! I agree that there are a lot of good things involved with it, but there are people who are confused about how the world should be run. As a christian, i kinda like the idea of communism because of it's fairness. but i would never support it due to its lack of free will to others! Please dont quote me that i am a communist or i like communism! I JUST LIKE THE IDEA OF IT IF WE WERE ALL PERFECT!I think the only perfect type of reigning will be in heaven and i cant imagine what that will be like!

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I have to say that there is no real "perfect" system.The issue is a fairly simple one. There are just too many people. Let's take into consideration, for example....We'll bring up a game as our example for this.World of Warcraft(random name - no relation to it).You have two clans, one with 10 people and one with 50 people, and you are voting on something.With 10 people it's quite easy, as there are far less people to deal with. With the 50 there is a MUCH greater chance of people arguing or disagreeing. How can you make democratic decisions when this happens? "For the people by the people.." Well, when it ends up half and half, no matter which choice you make you will end up with pissed off people.Along with this, take into consideration the way votes work. With 10 people each one is 10%. With 50, each vote is 2%. The number of people who will actually take part in the voting process is considerably less, being that people say "well my vote is only 2%, it doesn't matter." When 30 of those people do it, you've broken the voter base down to 40% already. So now they're voting for how others would feel as well, although it may not be true. This is one of the issues with voting in the USA right now. People keep arguing that with 100+ million votes or whatever, their ONE means nothing. Last I heard it was like a 60% non-voting rate.That's why democracy isn't as efficient in big numbers.On the other hand, I completely disagree with things like communists. That also works in small numbers but not in large groups. Mostly because of the fact that if you have 5 items and 10 people, they can share 50% of the time. With those same 5 items but 200 people, there are going to be fights and disagreements over who should get what, and when they should receive it.I guess all in all, it can be viewed as every government being flawed in it's own ways. They all have their strong points, but at the same time they all have negatives that go along with that.

[Watermonkey 0]

Wow. All these responses and not one of you seems to want to contradict what the second person said. Part of the problem in this world today is the staggering amount of mis-information that seems to be ingrained in the public, apparently from all over the world. The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic not a Democratic Republic. The founding fathers like Jefferson and his pals warned strongly of becoming a Democracy. Democracy, they warned us, would fail quickly because it's essentially Mob Rule and mobs are too easily manipulated. The current political climate here is edging ever closer to Democracy and ever further away from the Constitution that is the Law of the Land, which explains why we're teetering on the edge of a cliff, at the bottom of which lies total socialism/ communism /dictatorship /revolution. Just what the European immigrants were fleeing 250 years ago more or less when they settled here in the first place.

[Janissary 0]

There would be no perfect sytem as long as there is human interception in it. What I mean, power corrupts. The idea behind democry (for a decision to make, everyone should invole) isnt to find best answer. Democry is there to prevent corruption by dividing power among many people so to do illegal things or give selfish decisions you need to bribe more people.

Of couse down side is slow and sometimes unaccurete decisions.

Other systems can give better results but I believe it's gamble.

A "perfect" system would be a tyrany where every descision is made by a wise leader who has an in depth understanding of 'the big picture' and a similar understanding of human nature. It would take a perfect, uncorruptable person who also would need to be immortal, because his successor may not be perfect and uncorruptable.

I agree. Tyrany can give the best results but it's a Russian roulette.

Please visit my newly posted Best Goverment System topic.
Edited May 24, 2008 by Janissary (see edit history)