17-05-2002 08:39									#1
	The USA is the only Democratic Country in the World. Discuss. Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

My answer: yes.

Here's why:

Lets compare the UK and the US. I think most European governments resemble the UK more than the United States so my critque applies to them too. Their sepperation of powers is extremely weak. They have the House of Lords, the Monarchy, and the House of Commons. Over the years power has beome consentrated solely in the hands of the House of Commons. This is dangerous because ultimately this is an absolutist system.

If the House of Commons decides to cancel free speech who does one turn to protest...well the House of Commons. This one body is the end all and be all of British politics. Sure the MPs are elected by the people, but what if the majority decides to oppress the minority (it has been known to happen) then only a majority in Parliment is needed to make that happen. There are no proceedural safe-guards to stop it.

In the United States however if the people get whipped up in a frenzy and congress passes some outrageous new law (....lets say the Patriot Act) then individuals can appeal the law to the Supreme Court and the Court can unbiasedly (we would hope) decide whether that new law is compatible with the Constitution or not. If it isn't then the law is thrown out.

So a British style parlimentary system is much closer to "pure democracy" and thus very dangerous. In systems like this it is very easy for some populist demogauge to come along and get the people to vote in dictatorship. It is much harder to do in the United States.

A pure democracy is dangerous because the full and ultimate power is the people. Whatever they vote on is law. Majority rule. The country could wake up on Tuesday and decide to make all Guns illegal. Then hold another vote on Thursday and change their mind. Next week a vote could be called and 51% of the population approves a system of enslaving the other 49%. This is pure democracy.

I'd rather not live in a pure democracy like this.

A constitutional republic (and terms vary) like the United States I believe is a more rational system. This system has in place an absolute law which is contained in the Constitution. This is (or ideally should be) the ultimate arbitrer in running the government. There are sacred rights that are very difficult to overturn on a whim like in a pure democracy. Also our system has the incredibly important system of checks and balances and seppertion of powers. These are integral to the stability of our system and I am amazed more countries don't have it.

Not only is the UK autocratic because it only has one body which makes decisions, that one body isn't very democratic. The executive in this system is the Prime Minister, Tony Blair in this case. He is in charge of enforcing the law and in most cases he and his cabinet proposes most of the law as well. Between 85% and 97% of what the Prime Minister wants the Prime Minister gets. This my friends is nearly a dictatorship. Why is this?

It is because of the pluarlist (is that right?) system in the UK. Rather than voters voting for an individual candidate they vote for a political party. So the party apperatus decides who gets to be the canidates, and surprise surprize the party picks those people who are the most likely to follow the directions of the party leadership and least likely to think and vote independently.

Now lets say there is an election and Labour gets 51% of the vote (if that would happen), well until the next election the Labour party has a dictatorship over the country. 51% of the MPs are in Labour, and all those MPs were hand picked because they are least likely to disagree with the party leader. Who is the party leader? Well its Tony Blair. (I sure hope i didn't mix up party names) Who does the House of Commons pick for Prime Minister? Well with 51% of the vote, the Labour party picks Tony Blair. So if Tony Blair decides he wants to propose law A, well the very loyal 51% of the parliment votes to approve law A.

I have heard stats that said that around 97% of all laws proposed by Margaret Thatcher were passed into law. Can you imagine that? A dictatorship can be defined as one person making 100% of decisions. In the UK "democracy" one person can make up to 97% of decisions. How the frick is this any different?

Can you imagine 97% of every single piece of legislation proposed by George W. Bush becoming law? That'd be insane!

Now i've only used the UK as my example, because I don't know much else about other "democracies". I think France's cohabitation system is promising, but they are thinking about doing away with it now, ugh. But I'd wager most European governments are similar to the UK model, and most of them aren't much better than tyrannies of the majority, and popularly elected dictators.

Remember folks, democracy is something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

	17-05-2002 08:41									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Somebody seems to have forgotten about Canada as usual.

	17-05-2002 08:50									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

It's your stealth nation technology that shields notwithstandingland from most people.

	17-05-2002 08:50									#4
	I would agree. Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

THe US system is much more efficient and less autocratic in terms of Domestic agenda, no country could even come close to the balanced representation. But in terms of war policy, the president is the supreme general and gets what they want. When was the last time Congress proteseted a direct military action that the president supported and stopped the war? But I wouldn't live in any other country in this wide world,

	17-05-2002 08:50									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Asher Somebody seems to have forgotten about Canada as usual.

I admit, I am completely ignorant of the Canadian system of government (and many others). If it is an American system it gets two thumbs up from me. If its a British system, then its not all that great.

	17-05-2002 08:50									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Asher Somebody seems to have forgotten about Canada as usual.

It's a natural mistake.

	17-05-2002 08:54									#7
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by OzzyKP I admit, I am completely ignorant of the Canadian system of government (and many others). If it is an American system it gets two thumbs up from me. If its a British system, then its not all that great.

Canada takes the worst parts from both the British and American governments and melds them together, in a typical Canadian fashion.

	17-05-2002 08:55									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

That is awfully long-winded for a troll.

Tell us how wonderful the US's checks and balances would have worked if one Vermont Senator had not pushed the balance to the Democrats in the Senate and Rehnquist (73), Stevens (81) and O'Connor (71) all retire from the supreme court or simply die after a long stressful life?

Republican President, Republican Senate, Republican House and Strict Constructionist Supreme Court. Pretty much free reign to do as Bush pleases until the Republicans lose an election.

	17-05-2002 08:56									#9
	Re: The USA is the only Democratic Country in the World. Discuss. Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by OzzyKP So a British style parlimentary system is much closer to "pure democracy" and thus very dangerous. In systems like this it is very easy for some populist demogauge to come along and get the people to vote in dictatorship. It is much harder to do in the United States.

How does being closer to "pure democracy" equate to not being democratic?

	17-05-2002 09:00									#10
	Its Fair Get a bigger avatar today!

For one party to sweep the election and have friendly justices is rare and as Zell Miller, Lincoln Chaffee, and Jim Jeffords voting with your party does not happen all the time. And also the British system where the House of Commons ensures that it is Autocratic.

	17-05-2002 09:00									#11
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Echinda That is awfully long-winded for a troll. Tell us how wonderful the US's checks and balances would have worked if one Vermont Senator had not pushed the balance to the Democrats in the Senate and Rehnquist (73), Stevens (81) and O'Connor (71) all retire from the supreme court or simply die after a long stressful life? Republican President, Republican Senate, Republican House and Strict Constructionist Supreme Court. Pretty much free reign to do as Bush pleases until the Republicans lose an election.

No, because the Republicans aren't one entity. A Republican Congressmen and Bush might not neccesarily agree. Even it situations historically where one party controlled all institutions of government, there are still often disagreements. In Britain on the other hand, party discipline is much stricter and the PM has a huge amount of authority.

	17-05-2002 09:02									#12
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Echinda Republican President, Republican Senate, Republican House and Strict Constructionist Supreme Court. Pretty much free reign to do as Bush pleases until the Republicans lose an election.

To be honest this would be close to a political parties worst nightmare. Everything bad that happened until the next election would sit squarely on their shoulders, no way to shrug off the blame. This is probably the ultimate set of checks and balances in our political system.

Of course if everything went perfectly then there is no problem right?

	17-05-2002 09:03									#13
	Increase Your PM Length

First, this is a double post from another thread. Tsk.

Second, you contradict yourself. You say the US is the only true Democracy, then point out it isn't a true Democracy. Huh?

The United States is not a Democracy, it's a representative Republic. There are no truly Democratic nations, as true Democracy cannot exist effectively outside of the city-state environment.

Now, is the US the best representative Republic? Debatable, but I think, in the long run, no. I think the hinderances built into the system to meaningful change except through extreme measures will ultimately lead to our stagnation and then decline.

	17-05-2002 09:09									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Discuss what? It's blatantly wrong. Ignorance of all things non-american is the usual inspiration for grandiose american claims

In Australia, an entire governmnet was dismissed by their own appointee in the position of Governor-General. So much for no other country having a separation of powers

	17-05-2002 09:15									#15
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi No, because the Republicans aren't one entity. A Republican Congressmen and Bush might not neccesarily agree. Even it situations historically where one party controlled all institutions of government, there are still often disagreements. In Britain on the other hand, party discipline is much stricter and the PM has a huge amount of authority.

The Labour party isn't one entity either. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has his eyes firmly set on the PM's spot on the front bench in the commons. If Blair started acting funny, out come the knives and Blair is a political corpse. Remember, a Prime Minister is not elected to that position. He is merely an MP with the best ministerial portfolio. His own party can take him down. Just look at how Blair's right hand man faired when he started to get uppity. Even Blair couldn't save him from political disaster. The UK system has its own checks and balances that work pretty well, they're just more organic than the US system. And that is one of their strengths.

	17-05-2002 09:21									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

What is this mysterious, magical 'constitution' thing? Surelu US must be only country possessing it!

	17-05-2002 09:27									#17
	Re: The USA is the only Democratic Country in the World. Discuss. Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by OzzyKP There are sacred rights that are very difficult to overturn on a whim like in a pure democracy.

So you were not aware of the fact that black men were giving the franchisement in 1870, and then by the 1890's, had the franchisement taken away from them?? Not regaining the franchisement until the 1960's??

You were also not aware that anytime gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are given the same equal rights that heterosexuals have in any state, that it risks being rescinded if the political domination changes in the next four years??

You were also not aware that in our democracy, the institution of the death penalty is entrenched in racism??

	17-05-2002 09:35									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

"The UK system has its own checks and balances that work pretty well, they're just more organic than the US system"

I don't deny that there are some checks and balances in Britain, just that they are alot weaker then in the United States. For one, because the PM must always have a legislative majority, there can never be devided government in almost all instances. In the USA it is much more rare to see a non-devided government. And while Labour is not a single entity, it is alot more closely unified then the Republicans and the democrats. It is true that in Britain there are intra-party rivalries just as they are in the US- but on policy issues Labour is usually more unified. Congress, the same party as the president or not, often has different views on legislation then the president and try to influence the legislation to their likely. Congressmen of a certain party many times side with the opposition on any given vote, which can often decide whether a bill passes or not. In Britain, backbencher revolts do happen, but it is rare that the government's legislation is actually voted down in the commons. Overall, Blair has a much better chance of getting his legislation through the legislature then Bush does.

	17-05-2002 09:38									#19
	Re: I would agree. Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Il Duce THe US system is much more efficient

It is?

	17-05-2002 09:46									#20
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi Overall, Blair has a much better chance of getting his legislation through the legislature then Bush does.

You make some good points. But, remember, it isn't always Blair's legislation. He may like to think he is, but he isn't a president. If Gordon Brown isn't behind a financial act, Blair would be very hard pressed to get it passed. A big difference between US and UK politics is that in the US, major disagreements happen in front of the cameras. In a parliamentary system, the disputes happen in cabinet or in caucus, so they are not as publicised. But they certainly exist.

	17-05-2002 09:51									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

America is becoming less democratic and more plutocratic everyday.

It doesn't matter what political label is placed on a politicial if they're all owned by the same clique of corporations.

	17-05-2002 10:47									#22
	Inflate your Upload Space

How is it democratic when the current US president doesn't even have popular mandate?

	17-05-2002 11:01									#23
	Remove this text

I usually find Ozzy to be a fairly sensible guy, and I generally don't disagree with him on a large number of things, inevitable philosophical differences between a Communist and Librertarion not withstanding.
But come now Ozzy, to declare the US the only democratic nation is a bit much. I am understandably biased on this subject, but the power of corporations and various interest groups on the electoral process in the USA certainly can't be understated. At very least, it must be taken into serious consideration when considering the "freedom" of the United States compared to other countries.

Last edited by monkspider on 17-05-2002 at 11:08

	17-05-2002 11:06									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Not only the USA has build in safety mechanisms. Belgium for example has it also. Every year get many laws canceled and rewriten because the Belgian variant of the supreme court dedices taht they are against the contitution or are paradoxal with other laws(you may not have law A where you forbid having bears and law B where people are given the right to have bears in the same law because that's paradoxal, laws must be clear).

In Belgium would changing anything in the contitution take a long time, mostly longer then the time a government is in charge and it can always until accomplished be canceled. So if the people are really against a proposed consitution change will they vote for the opposition who will then form the next government and cancel the change in constitution. I think it is easier to add amandaments in the US then in Belgium.

But that build in safety mechanism is not undemocratic because they majority of the people like it.

Last edited by kolpo on 17-05-2002 at 15:04

	17-05-2002 11:07									#25
	Inflate your Upload Space

well we DID invent democracy

	17-05-2002 11:08									#26
	Tired of ads?

democracy can't be invented

	17-05-2002 11:11									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Technically, democracy was first used by the Athenians, as I'm sure many Greek members of our community will be quick to let you know.

	17-05-2002 11:13									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

we also invented SARCASM

	17-05-2002 11:15									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Echinda That is awfully long-winded for a troll. Tell us how wonderful the US's checks and balances would have worked if one Vermont Senator had not pushed the balance to the Democrats in the Senate and Rehnquist (73), Stevens (81) and O'Connor (71) all retire from the supreme court or simply die after a long stressful life? Republican President, Republican Senate, Republican House and Strict Constructionist Supreme Court. Pretty much free reign to do as Bush pleases until the Republicans lose an election.

Idiot.

	17-05-2002 11:15									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Ozzy, you seem to confuse "democracy" and "supposedly most stable system close to a democracy".

So, just to say something different, Switzerland is the most democratic country in the world. They have so many plebiscites that the citizens almost are bored of it.