Voting Question

[whitesilk]

If by definition voting is democratic, why do other parties exist?

[ilumairen]

21 minutes ago, whitesilk said:

If by definition voting is democratic, why do other parties exist?

 

The U.S. is a democratic republic. And I'm not sure if that helps at all.

 

[whitesilk]

13 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

And I'm not sure if that helps at all

 

There is not a single way to describe the complexities of the USA. Maybe it is time that I actually read 'The Federalist Papers'.

[whitesilk]

Food for thought:

 

'"This Government will commence in a moderate Aristocracy, in Its Operation, a Monarchy or a corrupt oppressive Aristocracy, vibrate some years between the two, and then terminate in the one or the other." --George Mason, September 1787 AD

[Aetherous]

Here's my basic knowledge on this. Please anyone correct if wrong about something...

The US is a "federal republic" and a "representative democracy".

"Federal" means it's a union of different states with their own governments, rather than just one big government over all the territory. We have the "federal government" which is kind of above all the states and concerns the nation as a whole, and "state governments" which concern just their individual state and have some protection against an overbearing federal government, due to the Constitution.

"Republic" means: government is considered a public matter (of, by, and for the people) and not the property of rulers or a private matter, positions of power aren't inherited, and the head of state isn't a monarch/king/queen. "Republic" can be translated directly as "public matter", and has always implied a kind of populism as opposed to monarchism. Basically, there's not supposed to be a ruling class vs the citizens situation in a Republic; we don't like royalty being over us! In a "Federal Republic" this applies to both the federal government and the state governments. The US has also been called a "Constitutional Republic" because it means that the government is guided or limited by the Constitution.

 

"Democracy" means that the citizens are able to vote on matters. There are different types of democracies...

 

"Representative democracy" means that the citizens vote for representatives to vote on individual matters (like bills that pass through the House and Senate), rather than citizens voting on issues directly (which would be called a "direct democracy"). Imagine having to go cast a vote on every bill that Congress is working on...most of us can barely be informed enough to vote sensibly as it is.
 

Here's the history of how the Democratic party was named: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)#History

[whitesilk]

I just picked up 'The Federalist Papers' from my bookshelf. There was major opposition to the Constitution after the American Revolution. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote these essays to defend the Constitution.

12 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

most of us can barely be informed enough to vote sensibly as it is.

I like C-SPAN.

[whitesilk]

I am looking for an answer to the question why does political separation exist?

 

[whitesilk]

It makes it extremely difficult for Senator John McCain to speak up for his beliefs.

[Stosh]

3 hours ago, whitesilk said:

I am looking for an answer to the question why does political separation exist?

 

What the hell are you asking? Is it...Why do we have parties?

Because Groups see commonality of opinion Which can be promoted more effectively as a collective effort. 

When a leader gets in office he tends to hand out positions to those who essentially agree with him , together they advance an agenda. 

To be surrounded by staff etc who has an essential hostility to their leader would be counterproductive. 

Yes the founders did rely on a sort of patriotism for the nation which was greater than for ones own issues. Generally speaking Americans really do have this Greater love for country , though we squabble internally. 

Not all nations have this or understand this.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Stosh

[Aetherous]

4 hours ago, Aetherous said:

Please anyone correct if wrong about something...

 

"Republic" can be translated directly as "public matter", and has always implied a kind of populism as opposed to monarchism.

 

I'll correct myself...apparently there's a subtle difference between republicanism and populism. In republicanism, it's more about rule of law governing the people as opposed to a ruling class. In populism, it's more about the people governing the people as opposed to a ruling class.

[whitesilk]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

Generally speaking Americans really do have this Greater love for country , though we squabble internally.

 

 

The commonalities among us are greater than most differences.

[whitesilk]

31 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

In republicanism, it's more about rule of law governing the people as opposed to a ruling class. In populism, it's more about the people governing the people as opposed to a ruling class.

 

Thank you for the clarification. I am naive in these matters, and well too careless and distracted to find the subtle difference that you've noted.

 

 

Edited November 6, 2018 by whitesilk

[Aetherous]

#MeToo

[Stosh]

58 minutes ago, whitesilk said:

 

 

The commonalities among us are greater than most differences.

Thats certainly true. 

[Aetherous]

On 11/6/2018 at 5:49 PM, Aetherous said:

I'll correct myself

 

I have to do this again.

What I said before was how things are supposed to be.

How things really are is described by this former President:
 

This is a direct result of the Supreme Court's worst decision ever.

So, I would say the US is no longer a "republic", because with an oligarchy (or a plutocracy), you have a wealthy ruling class vs the citizens. It's still probably true that someone without money could raise it through their party's campaign, and get into office...but it's very unlikely that someone who isn't doing well would be accepted.

Despite not being a republic, or the republic being subverted - it's still a representative democracy, to some extent. We still vote on which plutocrat we want.

The deep state is another thing to consider in whether the US is truly a representative democracy. It consists of people who attain very influential positions, often with less oversight and less checks and balances, but the public doesn't vote them in.

So...how things are supposed to be sounded pretty smart. How things are sounds like the opposite of what the founders intended.

[Marblehead]

Well, we still get to vote on those issues the wealthy and powerful allow us to vote on.  Something is better than nothing.

 

[Patrick Brown]

Well it does seem that the only way to become the president of America is to have lats of money! I'm not saying all presidents are corrupt or anything as it seems pretty obvious that buSINess is the problem, oh and the MIC. 

[windwalker]

32 minutes ago, Patrick Brown said:

Well it does seem that the only way to become the president of America is to have lats of money! I'm not saying all presidents are corrupt or anything as it seems pretty obvious that buSINess is the problem, oh and the MIC. 

 

 

Totally agree.  Please let us know when you quit your job.

 

And when another country comes to rule or whatever then some might understand what the military industrial complex is about.

 

The whole United States could be referred to as a military industrial complex. 

[windwalker]

9 hours ago, Aetherous said:

So...how things are supposed to be sounded pretty smart. How things are sounds like the opposite of what the founders intended.

 

 

The thing is that what they intended even from back then never totally worked as intended but did work just enough in spite of itself....What they faced then, we face now...

 

The main difference is technology allows things to happen at much faster pace...

 

 

Edited November 8, 2018 by windwalker

[whitesilk]

22 minutes ago, windwalker said:

then some might understand what the military industrial complex is about.

 

23 minutes ago, windwalker said:

The whole United States could be referred to as a military industrial complex.

 

 

While I agree being industrious is ingrained in us all, I does not mean we are fighting each other, where I'm from we are very kind.

 

 

[Marblehead]

Yeah, sweet home Chicago.

 

[windwalker]

7 minutes ago, whitesilk said:

While I agree being industrious is ingrained in us all, I does not mean we are fighting each other, where I'm from we are very kind.

 

does it,,,

 

"Number of people shot in Chicago this year surpasses 1,400"

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

does it,,,

 

"Number of people shot in Chicago this year surpasses 1,400"

Yeah, but most of them were already dead.

 

[windwalker]

Just now, Marblehead said:

Yeah, but most of them were already dead.

 

 

didn't stop em from voting....

[whitesilk]

For some reason, I was taught about the book of Lord Shang, It's name I thought was something about agriculture and industry:

 

http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/ps/cup/book_of_lord_shang.pdf