The debate "America is not a democracy" was started by
an anonymous person on
September 29, 2016, 5:25 am.
18 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Nemiroff posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
Lane posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Nemiroff, thereal, north, jack_tim_45, Hijumi, Deepansh, nellie11iah and 11 visitors agree.
Lane, Blue_ray, dalton7532, harshita, Rajat and 5 visitors disagree.
@Biggns Aw :( I'm a new voter of 18 years, I didn't realize that automatically made me stupid. Not an accurate generalization, especially when you consider the typical mindset of young people. While pressures from all over the place do exert a greater influence on us, as young people, we are adamant about one thing: forming our own distinct opinions and making our own decisions, despite what others may say(even if other people are correct). Unfortunately, our decisions are not always based on facts. But, on the topic of the election, it is decidedly difficult to decipher truth from all the falsehoods surrounding both of the candidates this year. Anybody who is serious about voting, however, will back up their decision with things that are relevant to them. One other thing to consider would be a recent population pyramid for the USA. From that data(and perhaps common sense), you will see that there are more voters over the age of 21, which is what you deem worthy, than there are voters under the age of 21. So which party really has the most impact? Is it us 18-21 year olds, or is it the older, more experienced voters? My point: don't generalize that way :p
I think that real, 100% democracy is not possible in large communities. Direct democracy and similar such structures of government are meant for small populations. As weird as it sounds, an example could be the population of Congress, which, in and of itself, votes as a sort of direct democracy(if I understand it correctly). When you think back to the time the country was forming it's government, the founding fathers wanted to be represented. This is the reason they protested and eventually broke off from England. It follows that it be a primary basis of the government today. Fortunately, it is. The states were already too populated for a direct democracy to be ideal, and the inevitable incline in the birth rate would only increase the population. The reasonable solution was a representative democracy. Fortunately, we are represented as voters, to a degree. That degree might differ depending on who you ask, but it is there. Because the idea of representation is encompassed by the idea of national democracy that has spread through parts of the world, I would say that America is a democracy, defined by what I just said.
you only have to look at the news and see middle aged people screaming that Obama is a Muslim to see that age does not being wisdom.
That is only a portion of the issue with democracy. Democracy is a universal rule for a diverse population. Even in closed confines, it sets itself up for mob rule.
Ultimately, voters are voters. The passions of 18 year olds remain in those who are 21. The passions continue forever. Those who are engaged with politics are forever engaged, and those who dont care dont care. Voters are reckless regardless of age, and if people cared, 18 is perfectly reasonable to have a supported, knowledgeable opinion to suffice.
Thats not a website, my big a** fingers typed in some dumb shit. Sorry about that.
Just to clarify you do realize i was talking about our new voters, if they were older and wiser, would.be ready to, if the country was a full blown democracy, would be ready for it. Just read all of my statements itll save me alot of time and i dont have to repeat myself. Sorry if i sounded rude in any way.
That is where i disagree. The phenomenon of an impassioned voting base has always been a problem. We have the electoral college to act as a barrier between the people and passion (Federalist Papers). Even so, a lot people still vote in a selfish manner. Im an period of progressive politics, we are yearning for despotism in order to provide for us. To clarify, we are socially corrupt and do not rely upon ourselves, but instead look to our government for relief. Another issue that was spotted by Ben Franklin. Frankly (haha get it), we are the same as we ever were--on the precipice of tyranny.
Next time i should probably write my statement better.
Yea we wouldve been but nowadays new voters, in other words people that have graduated at 18 or are 18, are stupid and they only vote for who's the most popular and they vote for that person. If the legal voting age was 21 then we would definetely be ready to rule the country as a whole.
We are primarily republican in form though. The overarching structure is that of a republic with added federalism and democracy.
Becausr democracy favors the majority, and republican may pander to the majority, but it elevates the minority. Its also allows locations the opportunity to be distinct, and the greatest responsibility of the state is to maintain its jurisdiction.
There was education, and even without, the people were current with the times.
and a republic is a representative democracy. it is still a democracy.
the problem with direct democracy is that the average person is dumb. and even more than that they are easily swept up in sensationalism and fear. the same things that pushed Hitler toward power are now pushing trump towards it. many things have changed, but human nature hasn't.
look at the brexit vote. people voted based on little to no information. they voted based on emotion and had no idea what the consequences of their vote would be. that is why we elect officials whose job it is to learn the details of these issues and make informed decisions.
assuming the people are as a whole, intelligent enough, and understand the long term consequences of the issues, why would them making decisions be a bad thing?Just 1 year ago I truly believed we were ready for such a responsibility.
Well if they relied completely on the people to make their decisions for them then it would cause a lot of problems in our society. We would have so much eventual power we would want it all and that would cause anarchy. But yea im glad they put a limit on it to.
back then, there was no education. I was actually for moving our nation more towards a direct democracy, but ever since Republicans nominated trump, I'm glad for the limits the fathers put on democracy and I hope the electoral college does the job it was created for.
I was wondering if someone was going to say that. The four fathers actually wanted something far from it. If the government was giving almost all major power to the people it would eventually lead to anarchy.
it isnt. it's a Republic.