5 ms·

Personally I would prefer a monarchy, or some merit based voting system - eg You get a vote if you can demonstrate you have the understanding to make informed d

by axod 16y ago

Personally I would prefer a monarchy, or some merit based voting system - eg You get a vote if you can demonstrate you have the understanding to make informed decisions.

ugh 16y ago
Monarchy?! Sure, you might be lucky and get a good monarch – but their son could be a total douchebag (like Wilhelm II, the gaffe-emperor who led Germany into World War I). I think that on the whole, elections are less random and more merit based than monarchies.
- michaelkeenan 16y ago
  But when monarchies work, they work so well! The richest (per capita) country in the world, Liechtenstein, is a monarchy. I think Qatar, also a monarchy, is second-richest, though that doesn't really count because it has so much oil.
- axod 16y ago
  The difference isn't that great really though. If you look at the dynasties that win elections in the US - Bush, Kennedy, etc They may as well be a monarchy. Democracy typically only gives you 2 choices, and if they are both from dynastial families, it's pretty much a monarchy with the illusion of democracy anyway. > "Monarchy?! Sure, you might be lucky and get a good monarch – but their son could be a total douchebag (like Wilhelm II, the gaffe-emperor who led Germany into World War I)." Sounds like Bush Sr and Bush Jr to me,
  - ugh 16y ago
    You know what we should do? Determine officials by lot! That’s an age-old democratic instrument first (and only, I guess) employed by the ancient Athenians [+]. Now that I think of it, randomness actually lives on with the jury duty. [+] As always with ancient democratic Athens several caveats apply, e.g. you had to be rather rich to be eligible for that.
random42 16y ago
The latter is how democracy was supposed to work (in the ideal world).
mbreese 16y ago
A monarchy, when you have a good monarch isn't bad. However, you tend to end up with these bloody conflicts every now and again over who gets to be the monarch. Merit might work, but it has the capability to discriminate against certain classes (even those who might otherwise make informed decisions). I might be able to accept a system where you have to perform some level of service to the state in order to gain a vote. Something like military service, peace corp, teaching, being an EMT, etc... But then that starts to seem to Starship Troopers to me.
- frobozz 16y ago
  How would it discriminate against people who might make informed decisions? The only qualification is that you have the understanding required to do so.
  - mbreese 16y ago
    These tests have been used to discriminate against various minority groups throughout the years. For example, you may have a perfectly good grasp of the issues and who best represents your point of view, but you suck at math. No votes for you. Or, you can't read. etc... that's why these tests have been been illegal for quite a while.
    - frobozz 16y ago
      "you may have a perfectly good grasp of the issues and who best represents your point of view" Yes, and this is all you need to prove - an example of such a test would be the ability to match up policy statements to candidates. No need for a maths test. Regarding the inability to read - If blind people can currently vote in your country, then the problem does not exist.
hnal943 16y ago
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. -Churchill

by axod 16y ago

Personally I would prefer a monarchy, or some merit based voting system - eg You get a vote if you can demonstrate you have the understanding to make informed decisions.

ugh 16y ago

Monarchy?! Sure, you might be lucky and get a good monarch – but their son could be a total douchebag (like Wilhelm II, the gaffe-emperor who led Germany into World War I). I think that on the whole, elections are less random and more merit based than monarchies.

michaelkeenan 16y ago
But when monarchies work, they work so well! The richest (per capita) country in the world, Liechtenstein, is a monarchy. I think Qatar, also a monarchy, is second-richest, though that doesn't really count because it has so much oil.
axod 16y ago
The difference isn't that great really though. If you look at the dynasties that win elections in the US - Bush, Kennedy, etc They may as well be a monarchy. Democracy typically only gives you 2 choices, and if they are both from dynastial families, it's pretty much a monarchy with the illusion of democracy anyway. > "Monarchy?! Sure, you might be lucky and get a good monarch – but their son could be a total douchebag (like Wilhelm II, the gaffe-emperor who led Germany into World War I)." Sounds like Bush Sr and Bush Jr to me,
- ugh 16y ago
  You know what we should do? Determine officials by lot! That’s an age-old democratic instrument first (and only, I guess) employed by the ancient Athenians [+]. Now that I think of it, randomness actually lives on with the jury duty. [+] As always with ancient democratic Athens several caveats apply, e.g. you had to be rather rich to be eligible for that.

random42 16y ago

The latter is how democracy was supposed to work (in the ideal world).

mbreese 16y ago

A monarchy, when you have a good monarch isn't bad. However, you tend to end up with these bloody conflicts every now and again over who gets to be the monarch. Merit might work, but it has the capability to discriminate against certain classes (even those who might otherwise make informed decisions). I might be able to accept a system where you have to perform some level of service to the state in order to gain a vote. Something like military service, peace corp, teaching, being an EMT, etc... But then that starts to seem to Starship Troopers to me.

frobozz 16y ago
How would it discriminate against people who might make informed decisions? The only qualification is that you have the understanding required to do so.
- mbreese 16y ago
  These tests have been used to discriminate against various minority groups throughout the years. For example, you may have a perfectly good grasp of the issues and who best represents your point of view, but you suck at math. No votes for you. Or, you can't read. etc... that's why these tests have been been illegal for quite a while.
  - frobozz 16y ago
    "you may have a perfectly good grasp of the issues and who best represents your point of view" Yes, and this is all you need to prove - an example of such a test would be the ability to match up policy statements to candidates. No need for a maths test. Regarding the inability to read - If blind people can currently vote in your country, then the problem does not exist.

hnal943 16y ago

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. -Churchill