Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 27, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 322

Democracy? No thank you.

:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I am always baffled when people advocate for a pure democracy, and it happens to be one of my biggest pet peeves when I hear people call the United States a "democracy." Even our elected officials do this on a regular basis.

The United States of America is not, and never was, a democracy. Why not? Because Democracy is nothing more than a tyranny of the majority. As Alexander Hamilton wrote, "It had been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience had 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; their figure deformity." In a true democracy, rules don't matter. A Constitution can be put in place in an attempt to protect the minority, but if absolute power rests with the majority, as is the case in a democracy, then the majority can simply trash the protections of the minority and continue to exploit them.

A Constitution Republic is the only form of government that places the decisions in the hands of the majority, and yet preserves the rights of the minority and gives them influence in government. This is why the founders created a Republic and firmly rejected the idea of democracy.

What do deviants think of the efforts by the government, such as the Seventeenth Amendment which changed the election of senators to a popular vote or a call to repeal the electoral college, to "democratize" the United States? I personally think it's rubbish and we need to stick with the Constitution. After all, it did give us the most stable and long-lasting free nation in the history of the world.
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconryrare:
Ryrare Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
If most people you argue with are liberal, where would you put yourself on the political scale from communism to libertarianism/anarchy?
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well, it's difficult to place myself on a "scale" since they're all different and pretty much all inaccurate. I consider myself classically liberal, since "conservative" doesn't cut it and "libertarian" doesn't work for every aspect of my political opinions. I think we need to stick to the original intent of the Constitution, with an extremely limited federal government.
Reply
:iconryrare:
Ryrare Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Don't worry, I know what classically liberal means. Most people I know are just neo liberals... then again I live in California so yeah
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Why can't The USA be more democratic?
Reply
:iconmiletich2:
miletich2 Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
It already is. Too democratic to say the least. :sarcasticclap:
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Really? And just how have authoritarian systems worked out for the past 100 years? Look at all the incidents involving police beating peaceful protesters, the Patriot Act, and the NDAA, then tell me how democratic this country is now.

Ahem: [link]
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012
The Patriot Act and NDAA were voted on and passed by a group of representatives. We, as a nation, elect these representatives.

There, I just told you how democratic this country is.
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Then what's your solution We're all dying to hear it.

I didn't vote for the people who passed those acts, so don't blame me.
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012
Solution to what? You being blatantly wrong? I provided the solution, it's called, you're wrong.
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Screw you.
Reply
:iconmiletich2:
miletich2 Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Are you accusing President Obama of being an obvious dictator?
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm just talking about things I don't agree with. But maybe.
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012
Um, both NDAA and the Patriot Act were passed via vote...that's democratic...

And violence is not a form of government...Police have beaten people in democracies, anarchies, fascist regimes, tribal societies, etc..etc..
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Because 51% of America is willing to sell their vote for an Obama phone.
Reply
:iconthegman0:
theGman0 Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist
lolwut?
Reply
:iconjackmolotov3:
JackMolotov3 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
OP doesn't like democracy because the country voted for "the other guy".

Instead of trying to break down Romneys loss via statistics then propose reasons why Mitt Romney DIDN'T get elected, he's opted for for statistically irrelevant rhetoric.
Reply
:icontristancody:
TristanCody Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2012  Student Writer
Great, and he has to have a name associated with one of my favorite genres of music too. Sad, really sad.
Reply
:iconjackmolotov3:
JackMolotov3 Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
so. the music is great

but the question is, does it define you?
Reply
:icontristancody:
TristanCody Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2012  Student Writer
Depends what bands and what songs, really. Some songs can depict a belief of mine perfectly, others falter wit angst.

Yet, if you are asking if the whole genre define me, no - not in the least.
Reply
:iconthegman0:
theGman0 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist
sounds about right.
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
lol no
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Never heard of that, did you just make that up or something? You sound just like :iconmeanus:
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I'm using the Obama-phone as an example. There's a video of people saying they voted for Obama because they got a free phone from his campaign. Many others voted for him because he promises more programs, more spending, and more taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of this. Free stuff for them with someone else shouldering the burden.
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I did not vote for Obama. [link] I voted for Stein. Nor did I see the "free phone" video.

As for taxes, someone who makes over 200 thousand dollars a year should pay more taxes someone who makes 50 thousand dollars a year.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Okay then I'm not talking about you.

Did you know that the wealthy pay a far larger share in taxes than the share of the wealth that they own? Talk about unfairness.
Reply
:iconjackmolotov3:
JackMolotov3 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
this is why I WANT democracy.

If a handful of people can enforce their rules on the rest of the nation, and then refuse to even discuss it with the majority, is the sole reason I want democracy.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
The 50% plus one can enforce their rules without limit on the minority. In a democracy, the majority could do whatever they wanted to the wealthy, who so unfairly "hoard" their wealth "without helping" the rest of us. The wealthy class would be torn down and our economy would collapse. Democracy is mobocracy.
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
Did you know that what you said is actually not true?
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
How is it not true? They own more wealth, but they pay a MUCH higher percentage than everyone else. The math simply says that they pay a larger share in taxes than their share in wealth.
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Nearly 1 in 3 Americans have income below the poverty line while many Americans live from paycheck to paycheck.

[link] And that's merely a conservative estimate...
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
What's your point?
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconchakatblackstar:
ChakatBlackstar Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012
Wouldn't the constitution still apply(albeit slightly modified by whatever amendment allowed this hypothetical scenario) if the United States were to convert to a pure democracy rather then the representative democracy we have now?
Reply
:iconjackmolotov3:
JackMolotov3 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
The constitutions would have to be thrown out entirely.

I pure democracy would still be unwieldy to govern in a nation of 300 million people.

I do not know of anyone who is aruging for a "pure democracy" or anyone a "pure republic". I want a democratic republic with slightly more democracy.

i.e. making the electorial college a paper only institution(which it is for the most part), and ballot initiatives on the federal level.

I still want elected leaders, with the rest of the constitution intact (plus amendments to fulfil planned changes)
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Most likely not, because under a pure democracy, the majority could have the power to change whatever they wanted to. I'm pretty sure the majority that voted for our current president would be perfectly fine with giving him unlimited power. He is, after all "our lord and savior," in the words of one liberal.
Reply
:iconjackmolotov3:
JackMolotov3 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
" I'm pretty sure the majority that voted for our current president would be perfectly fine with giving him unlimited power."

not true. I think the point of this thread is your just bitter your guy lost.

To quote a former platoon mate: "kick rocks nigga"
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
That's not even remotely true. You should listen a little less to your parents and Fox news.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Please show me how.
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012
"I'm pretty sure the majority that voted for our current president would be perfectly fine with giving him unlimited power. He is, after all "our lord and savior," in the words of one liberal."

This comment is beyond stupid. I do not need to prove why something this stupid is that stupid. You however do need to back up something this profoundly stupid with some sort of evidence. I'll save you the trouble, there is none.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
This is why I need a sarcasm font. Liberals are so sensitive.
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Dec 5, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Go back to the Fire Nation.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Dec 5, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Ha, I wish.
Reply
:iconrestinmotion:
RestInMotion Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012
lol, ok.
Reply
:iconchakatblackstar:
ChakatBlackstar Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012
Every faction has those who are prone to hyperbole. Believe me, while most liberals believe the current president to be better then his predecessor or the opposition he's faced during elections, many of us don't have enough faith in him to give him unlimited power. Not to mention that goes against the liberal ideal of freedom.

But back to the OT under a constitutional democracy should be restrained by the constitution the same as the current government. For example, if another 9/11 like situation arose and a strong anti-islam sentiment grew again among the majority, the constitution would still prevent them from banning it because the 1st amendment guarantees religious freedom in the US.
Reply
:iconpunker--rocker:
punker--rocker Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
...Yes.

(PS-I have never seen evidence that there was ever a strong anti-Islam sentiment among the majority, as you've said.)
Reply
:iconscnal:
Scnal Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
There is a difference between calling a country democratic and calling a country democratic to an absolute degree. Just like how you can't call America capitalist to an absolute degree or the USSR communist to an absolute degree, yet they still are.

Representative democracy gives power to a specific group chosen democratically, with them being in power for x amount of time. Ultimately, as with any specific singular group having disproportionate amounts of power, they'll want to keep that. From there, it's a slow gradual state of corruption. They still do what the majority wants them to, but keep whatever they can for themselves.

Direct democracy does not have this problem. There is no one specific handful of people with such a great amount of power over everyone else. The closest to that is the majority within the people. That is however a problem in itself, seeing as they are the majority, they're big and for the most part control the votes. That however, unlike in the representative form, is only a problem if the system is implemented badly. It doesn't need to be completely direct democracy and just be as close to it as possible before running into severe problems.

So basically, both have their problems. Both are almost solely what the majority wants, though representative democracy has the added problem of corrupt parties.
Reply
:iconprincess-amy:
Princess-Amy Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I'm all for you lot being reaquired under the empire
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Bad joke.
Reply
:iconprincess-amy:
Princess-Amy Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
That was opinion not a joke
Reply
:iconcosmic--chaos:
Cosmic--Chaos Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
So you are in favor of imperialistic greed?

If that's the case, screw your opinion.
Reply
:iconprincess-amy:
Princess-Amy Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Some one has to be an imperialist!!
Reply
Add a Comment: