In his early-Eighties Worlds trilogy, Joe Haldeman posits a future in which universal telecommunications access and something like the Internet results in something pretty close to true direct democracy - national voting two or three times a week (say, 8pm EST on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays). Major issues are put to a vote by the entire American adult populace (don’t think other countries were trying this), with time given to proponents and opponents of each issue on TV (sometimes opponents would pay for porn simulcasts instead, to distract the electorate) before voting began. You’d vote online within a five-hour window, or somesuch; don’t remember any reference to measures to ensure ballot security, although there must have been. There was still a President and Congress for more routine decision-making, IIRC.
That would never work. I have my martial arts class at those times.
My experience with “direct democracy” was really informed by the voters of California: somewhere around 1988 or 1986, voters approved three ballot initiatives to lower car insurance. (I may be off on the details here, but I’m sure I have the broad strokes.) One was sponsored by the insurance industry, and two others took completely different tacks on the issue. In the end, all three were completely contradictory, yet voters approved them all. It was a mess. One can complain a lot about how Washington works, but the alternative to throw all the big issues over to voters who make judgments based primarily on 30 second TV ads is a terrible one.
I fail to see how this creates a problem.
Incidentally, I’d also rule out theocracies, since as with monarchies, the ultimate authority is held to be something outside of the state itself, i.e. God.
So by your definition, which current or historical states are/were democracies?
The first-cut divide between Monarchy and Republic stopped making sense quite suddenly in 1918, when Europe stopped being divided that way. Prior to 1918, Republics were rare and Monarchies were largely one big feuding family from London to Moscow with territories around the world. In the 1920s and after, the first cut to make was between Republic and Dictatorship, with the UK a Republic and the USSR a Dictatorship. The fact the UK has a monarch means somewhere between jack and diddly.
I disagree. Even constitutional monarchies, by definition, are not republics. The (very backburner) debates in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK today about jettisoning the monarchy are always about “whether this country should become a republic.” It’s widely - and correctly, IMHO - acknowledged that they’re not, now.
The definition of “middle class” as “able to support a family of four in comfort on one income” is silly. And in any case, “class” doesn’t equate to income level. What makes someone middle class vs working class vs upper class?
I’m sorry, but a PhD professor is not working class, no matter what rathole apartment he lives in, or how poor he is at managing money. And a claim that $56,000 a year salary makes you poor? That’s above median! Take a look at the tax returns of the other people who live near you, and you’ll probably find that you’re making more than they are.
As for the contention that we don’t live in a democracy, please, not this again! Of course, usually it’s some right wing blowhard who claims that we’re not a democracy, and good thing too! And now this guy, who claims that because the rich and powerful are rich and powerful we aren’t living in a democracy.
As John Mace challenged you, under that definition there has never been a democracy in the history of the world. What’s the purpose of redifining a currently used word to mean a type of government that does not exist and has never existed and will never exist? Even in ancient Athens only citizens voted, not slaves, not women, not foreigners, not freedmen, not country people. And of course, they could and did vote on lots of things that are prohibited under our constitution, noteably things like bills of attainder.
You don’t get to redefine what words mean based on what you think they should mean.
Well, it’s silly to think you can support a family of four on a middle-class salary these days. What I’ve been saying is that I suspect this wasn’t always the case.
I don’t really give a shit if $56,000 is above the median. It is impossible to live well on that salary in this area. Look at **Shagnasty’s ** post, if you want the POV of someone else who lives in this area. Try consulting people who live near Boston, instead of spouting BS when you don’t know the living conditions here. It’s because of this that all of our peers are two-income families and have their kids in daycare 10 hours per day. At some point, people got the ideas in their heads that this constituted living a decent life. I think that a lot of Americans have lost sight of what is important in life. (And BTW you have no idea how good or bad I am as a money manager, so stuff the innuendo.)
I know this post sounds angry, but you came across as hostile and insulting. When prodded, I prod back.
The OP is upset about calling the U.S. a “democracy”? That’s nothing compared to the rash of grammatical and usage errors you hear in the media today. Even on somewhat more erudite public radio stations, you hear all the time of Catholic “dio-cees”; the singular is “diocese” and now everyone seems to have gotten mixed up and thinks the plural is “diocees” or something like that.
OK, maybe I should have said Democracy. That’s what this thread is about, isn’t it?
But look at it this way: Where is the real power? In the people, which means it’s a Democracy, mediated by elected representatives (the MPs), which means it’s a Representative Democracy, otherwise known as a Republic. The Monarch is a figurehead who can’t go against the popularly elected Parliament. (Spare me the “constitutional crisis” mumbo-jumbo. We all know what would happen in the real world.) Where the real power lies is where we should be looking at when we divide things up, not archaic figureheads with meaningless titles.
(Real ULTIMATE Power lies in the Ninjas, who are only kept in check by Chuck Norris.)