5 ms·

> no more democratic than say most European states I may get flamed or burned for saying this, but I believe we (in Europe and US) are currently pretty close t

by bostik 12y ago

> no more democratic than say most European states I may get flamed or burned for saying this, but I believe we (in Europe and US) are currently pretty close to the ancient form of Greek democracy. In the ancient Greece, the vote was a privilege of the free men. The definition of "free man" on the other hand was not quite what we think of in a modern society. To start with, only a few percent of the population actually was eligible to participate. [0] To qualify as a free man, you needed to have position and/or wealth. Usually the two came together. After all, what good would it do to allow plebs to vote? They could vote against your agenda! Better to control the access to the vote by simply ensuring that at least majority of the voting people already share a certain appreciation for the status quo. "But, but but... We can vote however we want" you say. Sorry, no you can't. Thanks to the nature of the system, you get to vote between two or three nearly identical alternatives. Outliers will not be even put on the ballot. (I think California is an exception, which introduces its own downsides.) The choices on the vote are in practice dictated by those with the most power or money. Lawrence Lessig outlined this situation with his only slightly satirical TED talk - a country of Lesters. [1, 2] But back to terminology. If the power is held by those with wealth, and decisions are made purely among the people who have the most to financially gain from them, what do you call such a system? Is there even a descriptive term for a mix of oligarchy and plutocracy? The True Greek Democracy? 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Participation_and_exclusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Participatio... 1: http://blog.ted.com/2013/04/03/how-we-can-make-elections-about-the-people-not-just-funders-an-excerpt-of-lawrence-lessigs-new-ted-book-lesterland/ http://blog.ted.com/2013/04/03/how-we-can-make-elections-abo... 2: http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim?language=en http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_t...

lclarkmichalek 12y ago
Maybe for the US you have only 2 choices, but Europe actually has quite a few "new" parties recently. UKIP[0], Podemos[1], and SYRIZA[2] (and many others I'm not well acquainted with) have all cropped up in the past few years, and have had quite a lot of success. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Independence_Party http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Independence_Party 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_%28Spanish_political_party%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_%28Spanish_political_pa... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Radical_Left http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Radical_Left
- bostik 12y ago
  To start with - I happen to be European. (Finn, living in UK.) I would say that all three of your examples actually confirm what I sad above. UKIP, Podemos and SYRIZA are all parties that rose to their position of power only after the status quo was already horribly disturbed. UKIP - While UK feels a bit xenophobic at times, it was only when the financial stability was shattered that a more-extreme-than-current protest movement gained power SYRIZA - rose to power after Greece economy was first demolished, and then further abused; again, the calm and nice status quo was disturbed Podemos - I hear Spain has suffered similarly since the financial crisis and is still in the process of starting their recovery
  - aswanson 12y ago
    UKIP, Podemos and SYRIZA are all parties that rose to their position of power only after the status quo was already horribly disturbed In the U.S., after horrible disturbances, we watch the two parties blame each other on talk radio, Fox News, and MSNBC and then vote the same parties in.
    - philwelch 12y ago
      The US hasn't had the "horrible disturbances" that Europe has had.
      - aswanson 12y ago
        I guess if you omit the civil war, ww1, ww2, the great depression, the financial crisis of 2008, racial strife, 1970s stagflation, and any number of major disruptions from the historical record, youre right.
        akie 12y ago
        Well, neither ww1 nor ww2 was as damaging for the US as it was for Europe... but then again, we started them ;-)
        12y ago
aviziva 12y ago
Here is latest talk from Lawrence Lessig -- Lawrence Lessig's Plan to take our democracy back live at the JCCSF: http://youtu.be/Lypn5aoJI6U http://youtu.be/Lypn5aoJI6U
tripzilch 12y ago
The Netherlands has actually way more choice in parties to vote for than just two or three. Smaller parties have pretty decent power to influence policy, as long as they get enough votes for a single seat. The difference between zero (no voice) and one seat is much more important than the difference between one, two or three seats. And even the larger parties are not at all identical, especially when compared to the US' Democrats vs Republicans (although I am aware that this is in the US largely due to the "gridlock" mentioned in the article). Also, even the larger traditional right-wing party VVD is relatively left-wing when compared to US politics--they even consider themselves "liberals", to the point that the word itself is often associated with right-wing politics (the previous chairwoman Femke Halsema of our Green Party sometimes explicitly referred to herself as "liberal", to mess with this preconception, and try and reclaim the term).

by bostik 12y ago

lclarkmichalek 12y ago

Maybe for the US you have only 2 choices, but Europe actually has quite a few "new" parties recently. UKIP[0], Podemos[1], and SYRIZA[2] (and many others I'm not well acquainted with) have all cropped up in the past few years, and have had quite a lot of success. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Independence_Party http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Independence_Party 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_%28Spanish_political_party%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_%28Spanish_political_pa... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Radical_Left http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Radical_Left

bostik 12y ago
To start with - I happen to be European. (Finn, living in UK.) I would say that all three of your examples actually confirm what I sad above. UKIP, Podemos and SYRIZA are all parties that rose to their position of power only after the status quo was already horribly disturbed. UKIP - While UK feels a bit xenophobic at times, it was only when the financial stability was shattered that a more-extreme-than-current protest movement gained power SYRIZA - rose to power after Greece economy was first demolished, and then further abused; again, the calm and nice status quo was disturbed Podemos - I hear Spain has suffered similarly since the financial crisis and is still in the process of starting their recovery
- aswanson 12y ago
  UKIP, Podemos and SYRIZA are all parties that rose to their position of power only after the status quo was already horribly disturbed In the U.S., after horrible disturbances, we watch the two parties blame each other on talk radio, Fox News, and MSNBC and then vote the same parties in.
  - philwelch 12y ago
    The US hasn't had the "horrible disturbances" that Europe has had.
    - aswanson 12y ago
      I guess if you omit the civil war, ww1, ww2, the great depression, the financial crisis of 2008, racial strife, 1970s stagflation, and any number of major disruptions from the historical record, youre right.
      - akie 12y ago
        Well, neither ww1 nor ww2 was as damaging for the US as it was for Europe... but then again, we started them ;-)
      - 12y ago

aviziva 12y ago

Here is latest talk from Lawrence Lessig -- Lawrence Lessig's Plan to take our democracy back live at the JCCSF: http://youtu.be/Lypn5aoJI6U http://youtu.be/Lypn5aoJI6U

tripzilch 12y ago

The Netherlands has actually way more choice in parties to vote for than just two or three. Smaller parties have pretty decent power to influence policy, as long as they get enough votes for a single seat. The difference between zero (no voice) and one seat is much more important than the difference between one, two or three seats. And even the larger parties are not at all identical, especially when compared to the US' Democrats vs Republicans (although I am aware that this is in the US largely due to the "gridlock" mentioned in the article). Also, even the larger traditional right-wing party VVD is relatively left-wing when compared to US politics--they even consider themselves "liberals", to the point that the word itself is often associated with right-wing politics (the previous chairwoman Femke Halsema of our Green Party sometimes explicitly referred to herself as "liberal", to mess with this preconception, and try and reclaim the term).