22-02-2005 00:46									#1
	American Democracy Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

There's some disagreement about the date of the inception of democracy in the United States. Was America a democracy from the start? Can a line be drawn? Does democracy exist anywhere?

	22-02-2005 02:06									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Dammit. The form cut off two of my options:
( ) It's not a democracy without referenda on major issues.
( ) Vote Chiquita Banana for President!

Could a moderator add them? Thanks.

	22-02-2005 02:07									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Virginia and Massachusetts both had fully functioning (ok, fully for white male land owners) colonial assembles in the 17th century (I.E. 1600's).

	22-02-2005 02:09									#4
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Virginia and Massachusetts both had fully functioning (ok, fully for white male land owners) colonial assembles in the 17th century (I.E. 1600's).

How can you have any kind of democracy (rule with the explicit consent of the majority) when the majority can't vote?

	22-02-2005 02:40									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The US was never conceived of as a Democracy. The framers feared and distrusted democracy as mob rule. That being said, the founders were all adherents to Liberalism. They wanted to create a Republic consistent within the framework of Enlightenment Liberalism. They did so. The US has been a Liberal Republic since inception.

However, to be consistent with our current understanding of democracy (everyone gets a vote), I'd say that the US became a "democracy" with universal suffrage.

	22-02-2005 02:44									#6
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Virginia and Massachusetts both had fully functioning (ok, fully for white male land owners) colonial assembles in the 17th century (I.E. 1600's).

I was thinking more along the lines of country-wide practices. Universal suffrage was implemented in many states several decades before it became federal law.

	22-02-2005 02:46									#7
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Wycoff The US was never conceived of as a Democracy. The framers feared and distrusted democracy as mob rule. That being said, the founders were all adherents to Liberalism. They wanted to create a Republic consistent within the framework of Enlightenment Liberalism. They did so. The US has been a Liberal Republic since inception. However, to be consistent with our current understanding of democracy (everyone gets a vote), I'd say that the US became a "democracy" with universal suffrage.

yeah what he said. We're not much more than a constitutional republic, but we do allow everyone to vote for certain offices.

I would go with universal suffrage as well. Sure black men and women were still pressured in some areas. But overall, everyone could vote- at least in theory.

	22-02-2005 02:47									#8
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo How can you have any kind of democracy (rule with the explicit consent of the majority) when the majority can't vote?

Well, Athens is considered a democracy

More seriously, it's a good question. "Democracy" is a word that requires a good defnition, which is not always easy. Robert A. Dahl has provided a widely accepted definition (though scholars are not unanimous to support it), in 8 criteria. I don't know them by heart, and I must go eat, but feel free to go look for them on google

	22-02-2005 03:08									#9
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The Articles of Confederation. I think the question of democracy is important. Are we looking at it from our view of democracy, or what democracy meant at the period of time. After all, blacks and women were not considered to be full persons at that time. So, that question is important to consider.

	22-02-2005 03:10									#10
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo How can you have any kind of democracy (rule with the explicit consent of the majority) when the majority can't vote?

How did Athens have democracy? Democracy should be defined more by form than by universal suffrage.

	22-02-2005 03:15									#11
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui The Articles of Confederation. I think the question of democracy is important. Are we looking at it from our view of democracy, or what democracy meant at the period of time. After all, blacks and women were not considered to be full persons at that time. So, that question is important to consider.

Blacks and women considered themselves to be full persons at the time

	22-02-2005 03:20									#12
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker How did Athens have democracy? Democracy should be defined more by form than by universal suffrage.

Naw. Otherwise I could have a government where only members of a particular religion that constitutes 3% of the population can vote and claim that it is a 'democracy'.

Athens could only be considered a democracy if we declare that all of the non voting inhabitants weren't even citizens but just regarded as the equivalent of foreign non-citizen residents.

	22-02-2005 03:22									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo Blacks and women considered themselves to be full persons at the time

That's nice, but doesn't mean anything.

	22-02-2005 03:25									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker Democracy should be defined more by form than by universal suffrage.

To me, that's necessary to call a Liberal government a representative Democracy. Any Liberal government without universal suffrage cannot be considered a "Democracy"

	22-02-2005 03:25									#15
	Put an end to popups!

Don't forget that traditional definitions aren't necessarily very helpful for this sort of discussion. We have at least two mostly unrelated interpretations of 'democracy' to contend with. One is the idealistic and constantly evolving 'democracy' as an ideology and virtue which has inspired revolutions and the other is a definition resulting from a sort of dry taxonomy of government structures which has had far less significance historically, except as a way of describing results after the fact.

	22-02-2005 03:27									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui That's nice, but doesn't mean anything.

ahh but if that means nothing, then

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui The Articles of Confederation. I think the question of democracy is important. Are we looking at it from our view of democracy, or what democracy meant at the period of time. After all, blacks and women were not considered to be full persons at that time. So, that question is important to consider.

likewise means nothing, since as detached after the fact observers we have no reason to give a rat's arse what the non women non blacks of the time thought either.

So a meaningless response to a meaningless statment seems fitting to me.

	22-02-2005 03:31									#17
	Tired of ads?

We didn't have universal white male sufferage until after the 1841 Dorr County War in Rhode Island.

Slavery was not abolished in 1863. It was abolished with the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1867, except as a punishment for a crime.

	22-02-2005 03:36									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Are we looking at it from our view of democracy, or what democracy meant at the period of time.

We kind of have to take our own viewpoint, don't we? Otherwise we'd be engaging in temporal relativism, that stunted, ugly cousin of cultural relativism, that conservatives often tend to love. You know, the kind where cannibalism and other such uncivilized vices of the third world are condemned on heavy terms but massacre and other such behavior by our ancestors is given a pass because 'they didn't know any better'. And such relativism of any kind should only be fit for, well, hippies.

	22-02-2005 03:42									#19
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: since as detached after the fact observers we have no reason to give a rat's arse what the non women non blacks of the time thought either.

Doesn't follow. Considering what definition of democracy we are using doesn't lead to caring what blacks and women thought of their plight. If we look at our definition, then it wasn't because they didn't get everyone voting. If we look at theirs, it was because blacks and women weren't considered to have the right. In both cases the opinions of blacks and women at the time don't play a part.

quote: Otherwise we'd be engaging in temporal relativism, that stunted, ugly cousin of cultural relativism

Hi, I'm a relativist .

	22-02-2005 03:57									#20
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: since as detached after the fact observers we have no reason to give a rat's arse what the non women non blacks of the time thought either. Doesn't follow. Considering what definition of democracy we are using doesn't lead to caring what blacks and women thought of their plight. If we look at our definition, then it wasn't because they didn't get everyone voting. If we look at theirs, it was because blacks and women weren't considered to have the right. In both cases the opinions of blacks and women at the time don't play a part. quote: Otherwise we'd be engaging in temporal relativism, that stunted, ugly cousin of cultural relativism Hi, I'm a relativist .

I love this sort of discussion! I'll have to dig this thread up again when I get back.

Anyway, Why should we look at their definition as opposed to the definition that blacks or women would have given? For that matter why should we look at anybody elses's definition when we have our hands full enough as it is just looking at our own definition?

	22-02-2005 04:02									#21
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo Anyway, Why should we look at their definition as opposed to the definition that blacks or women would have given? For that matter why should we look at anybody elses's definition when we have our hands full enough as it is just looking at our own definition?

Remember, they didn't even call their system a Democracy. In fact, they stringently denied that they were creating a Democracy, and created a governing structure that was designed to mitigate the power of popular opinion. If they didn't think that they had a Democracy, then why should we say that they did?

	22-02-2005 04:04									#22
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Why should we look at their definition as opposed to the definition that blacks or women would have given?

Cause they weren't in power. They didn't set up the system. So their definition isn't important in determining what the era called such a system at the time. The 'era' is defined by those in power.

quote: For that matter why should we look at anybody elses's definition when we have our hands full enough as it is just looking at our own definition?

Because the question, IMO, concerns whose definition to use first. That's the premier question, WHAT that definition is, is second.

	22-02-2005 04:05									#23
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Wycoff Remember, they didn't even call their system a Democracy. In fact, they stringently denied that they were creating a Democracy, and created a governing structure that was designed to mitigate the power of popular opinion. If they didn't think that they had a Democracy, then why should we say that they did?

Well, do we consider a Democratic Republic to be a democracy? After all, the largest party in the first 50 years of the republic were called the "Democratic Republicans". Of course they changed their name to the "Democratic" Party with Andrew Johnson.

	22-02-2005 04:13									#24
	Support Apolyton

The meaning of the word "democracy" has eveolved since then (I don't think that a country is a "democracy" if it claims to be one). Basically, the only past experience of a democracy the world had known at the time of the Founding Fathers was the Greek city-State. It has changed since then.

There are now definitions of "democracy" (liberal democracy to be accurate) that have the extension of political and civil rights, as well as checks and balances as the core of the definition. Voting is only one component of the definition of the liberal democracy, and it's not even the most important. A liberal democracy is all about restraining the majority (politically and non-politically speaking) from abusing its powers, and the possibility to "throw the rascals out" is more a means to that effect than an end. The ideal of the liberal democracy is strongly influenced by Anglo-Saxon liberalism.

The US is a clear-cut case of a liberal democracy. I'd say it has been as such as soon as all citizens enjoyed an equality of rights, i.e. after the end of segregation*


*I know there are several issues of "equal rights" that haven't been worked out yet, making the US not exactly corresponding to the ideal of liberal democracy (gay marriage, blacks on death row...). However, the scope of these issues is pretty trifle in comparison with the way an average dictatorship treats the rights of its citizens.

	22-02-2005 04:18									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor The US is a clear-cut case of a liberal democracy. I'd say it has been as such as soon as all citizens enjoyed an equality of rights, i.e. after the end of segregation* *I know there are several issues of "equal rights" that haven't been worked out yet, making the US not exactly corresponding to the ideal of liberal democracy (gay marriage, blacks on death row...). However, the scope of these issues is pretty trifle in comparison with the way an average dictatorship treats the rights of its citizens.

Yeah but I think "equal rights" are up to interpretation. There is no definitive version of equal rights as I'm sure members of PETA will argue. I think the scope of equal rights should be defined by a groups opportunity to infuence their position, not the relative position of the group.

	22-02-2005 04:22									#26
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

There´s democracy in the US?

Vote Banana!

	22-02-2005 04:24									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

no banana option

	22-02-2005 04:25									#28
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

So here's a brain bender: Is a democracy defined by the ability of a group (or person) to represent itself, or the opportunity for a group (or person) to represent itself?

	22-02-2005 04:30									#29
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo How can you have any kind of democracy (rule with the explicit consent of the majority) when the majority can't vote?

The same reason we can talk about the ancient greek Democracies which had large slave populations and noncitizens who couldn't vote. Because it is a significant advance which was different from the way in most of the rest of humanity lived.

	22-02-2005 04:30									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

The latter of course. If there´s no opportunity for representation there´s not any democray.