4 ms·

Two questions: 1. What is the difference between elected dictatorship and democracy? 2. Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? Th

by NTDF9 10y ago

Two questions: 1. What is the difference between elected dictatorship and democracy? 2. Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? This president and how elections are held in this country are a joke. So much for democratic process and respect for the office.

a_humean 10y ago
1) If I had to guess you are conflating two things when you say democracy. When people say 'democracy' in western countries they are usually referring to a particular form of democracy: liberal representative democracy, or also occasionally refereed to as constitutional democracy. Its quite possible to have illiberal democracies with some contemporary illiberal democracies being Egypt, Russia, Philippines, and increasingly Turkey. Democracy, in either its representative or direct form doesn't guarantee liberal values such as due process, freedom of the press, and formal or informal political oppositions. A population can keep willing electing a dictator and that dictator could even be popular, but that political system would not be a 'democracy' as you might normally recognise; it will espouse none of the liberal values that places like the UK and the US typically expect.
- x0137294744532 10y ago
  Democracy is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body. If basic human rights aren't guaranteed by the government, citizens may not be able to exercise their power. Other actors may therefore rule and govern. As such, authoritarian regimes that denies such rights to its citizens can't be called democracies.
cmdrfred 10y ago
>What is the difference between elected dictatorship and democracy? In countries where elected dictators rule you can vote for anyone you want, as long as its the dictator. >Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? This president and how elections are held in this country are a joke. So much for democratic process and respect for the office. This statement only holds water if you'd feel that same way if your preferred candidate won.
- NTDF9 10y ago
  >> This statement only holds water if you'd feel that same way if your preferred candidate won. The fact that a bumbling idiot (apologies for my language)can become the leader of a country, fill the white house with 'swamp' leaders and within ONE WEEK sign so many executive orders and actions: - without studying the history of why things are the way they are - without appropriate counsel of stakeholders - without any repercussions for such actions (no checks and balances provided by democratic systems) I think my statement holds water regardless of who got elected president.
  - komerdoor 10y ago
    Obama also signed many executive orders in his first week. He set the precedent. >> - without studying the history of why things are the way they are In this case. Studying history about immigration from certain countries? >> - without appropriate counsel of stakeholders Who decides what is appropriate? >> - without any repercussions for such actions (no checks and balances provided by democratic systems) Chosen for by the US democratic system and exactly done as promised.
- mickronome 10y ago
  The definition of what constitutes a democracy reaches far beyond 'majority rule' and having a voting process. I'm not going to go into detail here as there are multiple easily found primary sources on the subject.
pfortuny 10y ago
Executive orders are quite limited in their scope although they may be very harmful. They are not laws and can certainly be illegal and hence repelled.
- denzil_correa 10y ago
  > They are not laws and can certainly be illegal Turns out, that the specific Immigration Trump order is illegal. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigratio...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
zigzigzag 10y ago
Well, but how is it not democratic? Didn't Trump say many times he'd do exactly this, and he won? Arguably executive orders should not exist, nor should a powerful President. The Swiss system of a rapidly rotating presidency and strong "state rights" seems preferable to me. But the USA has strong elected Presidents and I never saw any American seriously challenge that setup, I hear more talk of states seceding than I see talk of changing the constitution to limit the power of the POTUS. So I don't see your point. The people were given a (fairly crappy) choice, made it, now their preferences are being implemented. That's democracy. Don't get me wrong. I think locking people who live in America out of the country because they happened to be on vacation at the time is outrageous, stunningly stupid. But maybe if prior generations of politicians had been more responsive to anti-Muslim sentiment things wouldn't have got so extreme now.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- JshWright 10y ago
  This was not the preference of "the people". It was the preference of the the (narrow) preference of the voters in a handful of states important in the Electoral College process.
  - JshWright 10y ago
    Wow... Apparently I shouldn't post before coffee. That second sentence went completely off the rails there.
- jbmorgado 10y ago
  "Well, but how is it not democratic?" It's quite simple, it's not democratic in the sense that the majority of the population voted for another candidate, but in the end Trump got elected. Final ballot count: Hilary: 65,844,610 votes Trump: 62,979,636 votes Now, I understand these are the electoral rules in the USA and I'm not saying Trump won unfairly, but he certainly didn't win democratically since the majority of voters didn't want him there.
joefreeman 10y ago
The Dictator's Handbook is a great book if you're interested in the difference between autocracies and democracies. Also, CGP Grey's 'The Rules for Rulers' video is a good intro if you only have 20 mins -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
maxerickson 10y ago
2. Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? The people screaming that before this will mostly be proud of this action. The number of refugees the US had taken from Syria was already pathetic. Stopping taking any is straight up evil.
skywhopper 10y ago
The people who actually supported Trump are likely pleased with how things are going. He's doing exactly the sorts of things he said he would do. In the US, the President does have a pretty crazy amount of power, and recent Presidents have all expanded that power, with Congress's and the Supreme Court's assent most of the time. So now we get a President with no respect for the office or anything, which is exactly how he campaigned, and he's going to abuse that power as much as he can. It's truly frightening. As for democracy, this election actually wasn't an example of it. Millions more voters voted against Trump. The US Presidential election system is obviously broken. It was obviously a ridiculous system before the elections of 2000 and 2016 proved that it was. Believe me, most Americans agree with you that our elections have become a joke. Congressional districts have been redesigned in the past 10 years to give Republicans a huge unnatural advantage in the House of Representatives. And the US Constitution itself gave us the undemocratic Senate and Electoral College. These things are by design. They were built to be safeguards against democracy run amok. But now the GOP has figured out how to make those safeguards work against the country. It's going to get ugly. It could happen really fast. I'm genuinely scared about the future of the US and the world.
- denzil_correa 10y ago
  > These things are by design. And this is why, I'm of the opinion that the design needs to be changed.
- shard972 10y ago
  > Believe me, most Americans agree with you that our elections have become a joke. Congressional districts have been redesigned in the past 10 years to give Republicans a huge unnatural advantage in the House of Representatives. And the US Constitution itself gave us the undemocratic Senate and Electoral College. How is the senate undemocratic? Isn't it the same as pretty much every other western democracy? I know it pretty much mirrors what we have in Australia except that we have a lot less states.
  - dekhn 10y ago
    The Senate isn't inherently undemocratic, but it's not population-representative. It gives an effective psuedocount of 2 to each state, regardless of its population. For states with very little population (think Wyoming compared to California) it gives them a distinct additional voting strength that is not population proportional representative.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by NTDF9 10y ago

a_humean 10y ago

1) If I had to guess you are conflating two things when you say democracy. When people say 'democracy' in western countries they are usually referring to a particular form of democracy: liberal representative democracy, or also occasionally refereed to as constitutional democracy. Its quite possible to have illiberal democracies with some contemporary illiberal democracies being Egypt, Russia, Philippines, and increasingly Turkey. Democracy, in either its representative or direct form doesn't guarantee liberal values such as due process, freedom of the press, and formal or informal political oppositions. A population can keep willing electing a dictator and that dictator could even be popular, but that political system would not be a 'democracy' as you might normally recognise; it will espouse none of the liberal values that places like the UK and the US typically expect.

x0137294744532 10y ago
Democracy is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body. If basic human rights aren't guaranteed by the government, citizens may not be able to exercise their power. Other actors may therefore rule and govern. As such, authoritarian regimes that denies such rights to its citizens can't be called democracies.

cmdrfred 10y ago

>What is the difference between elected dictatorship and democracy? In countries where elected dictators rule you can vote for anyone you want, as long as its the dictator. >Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? This president and how elections are held in this country are a joke. So much for democratic process and respect for the office. This statement only holds water if you'd feel that same way if your preferred candidate won.

NTDF9 10y ago
>> This statement only holds water if you'd feel that same way if your preferred candidate won. The fact that a bumbling idiot (apologies for my language)can become the leader of a country, fill the white house with 'swamp' leaders and within ONE WEEK sign so many executive orders and actions: - without studying the history of why things are the way they are - without appropriate counsel of stakeholders - without any repercussions for such actions (no checks and balances provided by democratic systems) I think my statement holds water regardless of who got elected president.
- komerdoor 10y ago
  Obama also signed many executive orders in his first week. He set the precedent. >> - without studying the history of why things are the way they are In this case. Studying history about immigration from certain countries? >> - without appropriate counsel of stakeholders Who decides what is appropriate? >> - without any repercussions for such actions (no checks and balances provided by democratic systems) Chosen for by the US democratic system and exactly done as promised.
mickronome 10y ago
The definition of what constitutes a democracy reaches far beyond 'majority rule' and having a voting process. I'm not going to go into detail here as there are multiple easily found primary sources on the subject.

pfortuny 10y ago

Executive orders are quite limited in their scope although they may be very harmful. They are not laws and can certainly be illegal and hence repelled.

denzil_correa 10y ago
> They are not laws and can certainly be illegal Turns out, that the specific Immigration Trump order is illegal. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigratio...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

zigzigzag 10y ago

Well, but how is it not democratic? Didn't Trump say many times he'd do exactly this, and he won? Arguably executive orders should not exist, nor should a powerful President. The Swiss system of a rapidly rotating presidency and strong "state rights" seems preferable to me. But the USA has strong elected Presidents and I never saw any American seriously challenge that setup, I hear more talk of states seceding than I see talk of changing the constitution to limit the power of the POTUS. So I don't see your point. The people were given a (fairly crappy) choice, made it, now their preferences are being implemented. That's democracy. Don't get me wrong. I think locking people who live in America out of the country because they happened to be on vacation at the time is outrageous, stunningly stupid. But maybe if prior generations of politicians had been more responsive to anti-Muslim sentiment things wouldn't have got so extreme now.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
JshWright 10y ago
This was not the preference of "the people". It was the preference of the the (narrow) preference of the voters in a handful of states important in the Electoral College process.
- JshWright 10y ago
  Wow... Apparently I shouldn't post before coffee. That second sentence went completely off the rails there.
jbmorgado 10y ago
"Well, but how is it not democratic?" It's quite simple, it's not democratic in the sense that the majority of the population voted for another candidate, but in the end Trump got elected. Final ballot count: Hilary: 65,844,610 votes Trump: 62,979,636 votes Now, I understand these are the electoral rules in the USA and I'm not saying Trump won unfairly, but he certainly didn't win democratically since the majority of voters didn't want him there.

joefreeman 10y ago

The Dictator's Handbook is a great book if you're interested in the difference between autocracies and democracies. Also, CGP Grey's 'The Rules for Rulers' video is a good intro if you only have 20 mins -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

maxerickson 10y ago

2. Will Americans stop screaming 'Murica', 'We are number 1' from now? The people screaming that before this will mostly be proud of this action. The number of refugees the US had taken from Syria was already pathetic. Stopping taking any is straight up evil.

skywhopper 10y ago

The people who actually supported Trump are likely pleased with how things are going. He's doing exactly the sorts of things he said he would do. In the US, the President does have a pretty crazy amount of power, and recent Presidents have all expanded that power, with Congress's and the Supreme Court's assent most of the time. So now we get a President with no respect for the office or anything, which is exactly how he campaigned, and he's going to abuse that power as much as he can. It's truly frightening. As for democracy, this election actually wasn't an example of it. Millions more voters voted against Trump. The US Presidential election system is obviously broken. It was obviously a ridiculous system before the elections of 2000 and 2016 proved that it was. Believe me, most Americans agree with you that our elections have become a joke. Congressional districts have been redesigned in the past 10 years to give Republicans a huge unnatural advantage in the House of Representatives. And the US Constitution itself gave us the undemocratic Senate and Electoral College. These things are by design. They were built to be safeguards against democracy run amok. But now the GOP has figured out how to make those safeguards work against the country. It's going to get ugly. It could happen really fast. I'm genuinely scared about the future of the US and the world.

denzil_correa 10y ago
> These things are by design. And this is why, I'm of the opinion that the design needs to be changed.
shard972 10y ago
> Believe me, most Americans agree with you that our elections have become a joke. Congressional districts have been redesigned in the past 10 years to give Republicans a huge unnatural advantage in the House of Representatives. And the US Constitution itself gave us the undemocratic Senate and Electoral College. How is the senate undemocratic? Isn't it the same as pretty much every other western democracy? I know it pretty much mirrors what we have in Australia except that we have a lot less states.
- dekhn 10y ago
  The Senate isn't inherently undemocratic, but it's not population-representative. It gives an effective psuedocount of 2 to each state, regardless of its population. For states with very little population (think Wyoming compared to California) it gives them a distinct additional voting strength that is not population proportional representative.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]