4 ms·
> "... as long as a majority of people agree to them ..." That requires that people are informed and able to comprehend the ramifications of their choices. Con
by amirmc 12y ago
> "... as long as a majority of people agree to them ..."
That requires that people are informed and able to comprehend the ramifications of their choices. Consider this: Is it still democratic if those who happen to be in charge are busy lying to and hoodwinking a poorly informed 'electorate'?
As for the rest of your comment, it is not democracy simply because a majority agree it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
- LLWM 12y agoThere's no reason to believe the US government has to make any real effort to make sure voters are misinformed. They seem to manage it just fine on their own.
- bediger4000 12y agoYou're glossing over a huge amount of stuff relating to who does the reporting and how the reporting on the government is done. There's plenty to suggest that the government actively works to keep journalists in line. The Sterling prosecution and James Risen's legal problems spring to mind. The heavy weight of the Espionage Act also comes to mind, as does the very heavy use of "anonymous" or "unnamed sources" these days. In short, it really looks like some parts of the US government actively work to keep reporting very favorable or non-existent.
- LLWM 12y agoOh, sure, they might do it anyway, I'm just saying it's not needed.