1.

2008 10:46

rich2606
Overlord in Training

Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Essex Posts: 3,048

Re: Is democracy the best form of government? If so, why? well its good because of its systems of checks and balances to prevent abuse of power by governments. but i dislike the fact that people who don't have a clue about politics and world issues get to have as much say as those who do. seeing members of the public being interviewed on the street about the credit crunch was cringeworthy. along with pretty much every interview you see of the average american... but i guess in the end all the stupid and uninformed views balance themselves out and i can't think of a better way that isn't open to abuse.
Last edited by rich2606; 02-11-2008 at 10:49.

1 0 #6 02-11-2008: 2nd November 2008 10:58

numb3rb0y
Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room

Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: The place where all those assholes voted BNP Posts: 4,559

Re: Is democracy the best form of government? If so, why? Let's be clear on this, first of all; democracy is absolutely not a guarantee of freedom or checks and balances. In fact, true democracy wouldn't have any guarantees outside popular will, because people could vote against those things and lose them as a result. Every democracy in the world restricts liberty to differing degrees but they all restrict it, and many don't have any real checks and balances whether on a practical or idealistic level. Now, the answer really depends on the ideology of whoever you're asking the question to. Democracy does a pretty good job of stopping the majority from getting angry enough to consider revolution in serious terms, but it can and often does completely screw over sociopolitical minorities. In my opinion a night

watchmen state would be the best form of government, which could theoretically be democratic but only in terms of selection based on competence, as any ideology that didn't involve ultra-libertarian minarchist principles would be ineligible to gain any power in government. It is my view that, quite frankly, non-NWS democracy is a bad thing because it exists purely as a tool to allow people to force their views onto those different and persecute minorities. Quite simply, if that wasn't the case, then we'd all be perfectly happy with a night watchmen state, because that wouldn't preclude voluntary acts of any kind so people of differing ideologies would be free to come together (or not, if they didn't want to) and live their live as they chose so long as doing so didn't involve coercing anyone. I'd also submit that as far as I'm aware no-one has actually tried a night watchmen state, so it's not as if its failing to work would be a mark against it as an idea. Ideology and policy-base democracy keeps the majority happy by letting them force their views onto disagreeing minorities, and as such, from a moral perspective I could never consider it acceptable. 0 0 #7 02-11-2008: 2nd November 2008 11:01

The Strangest Quark

Exalted and Worshipped Member

Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Bristol Posts: 959

Re: Is democracy the best form of government? If so, why? No, it isn't. The majority of people aren't all that bright or well informed, and are massively prone to manipulation (by, for example, the Daily Mail). Government by the majority is essentially a government by the lowest common denominator - huge numbers of people with little understanding of an issue but a strongly held emotional viewpoint will vote on it led by their bigotry rather than any modicum of sense. Just look at the Euro - essentially an economic issue which degenerated in the public mind into a matter of petty nationalism and reluctance to change, culminating in "save our pound" campaigns. Did all those people understand the economic issues? Hell no, they just wanted the same old familiar coins in their pockets and a vague feeling of national superiority. And on civil liberties issues, to follow the majority is extremely dangerous - a quick look at the BBC "have your say" section will soon show you that a lot of people strongly believe that various other sections of society should have their rights removed, or are in favour of strong government censorship, or are happy to be spied on by the government because "those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear". Of course, we don't live in a real democracy but in a representative democracy which is anything but. The views of small numbers of people who form "key demographics" or who live in important constituencies will occasionally be listened to, but on the whole the views of the public are of little consequence once they've put their cross on their piece of paper once every 4 years to choose between options of government which are all but indistinguishable. There will be some occasional crowd-pleasing gestures to appease the voters, but essentially there is little democratic about it. And the terms of office served by governments guarantee that they will never consider the long-term consequences of their actions. I feel that the best form of government would be some form of benign dictatorship, with a 'wise king/queen' type leader - perhaps an actual king/queen, since the advantages of a monarch is that although they may be genetically disadvantaged, they can be educated suitably and trained to govern from a young age, and instilled with a sense of duty to their country. Not the current royal family, I hasten to add! A new one could be created easily enough. The power of the king would not be absolute, he would need to have wellinformed advisors, preferably eminent scholars in a wide range of fields, who perhaps would also need to vote in favour of each of his decisions before they were passed.

Of course, I'm only a physicist and I know sod all about the humanities so feel free to ignore me haven't had any coffee yet today so my thinking is impaired.

And I

1 1 #8 02-11-2008: 2nd November 2008 12:20

DayneD89
TSR Royalty Wiki Support Team

Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Oxford

Re: Is democracy the best form of government? If so, why? I think a dictatorship with a wise and intelligent person running it would be the best. Unfortunately power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, so this wouldn't work, and what about his successor? As Churchill said: democracy is the worst form of government, exept for all the others we have tried. Its the best of all rubbish systems of government.