Democracy doesn't work

the problem with democracy (and sadly the same could be said to a certain degree for all governments) is that it only works in theory. in the real world, corruption is everywhere. it seems to me the american government is entirely fueled towards keeping corporations happy and more importantly constantly violating their own constitution. you guys have heard about the “incident” in pittsburgh involving the most blatant first ammendant violation ive ever seen right? if you didnt heres the story. there was a presidential rally in pittsburgh in which there were people with signs regarding bush’s policies, some possitive, others negative. the secret service forced all the people with negative signs stand behind a fence out of the way so bush couldnt see them. now that right there proves that america’s “democracy” will not allow its own citizens to voice their opinions. but thats not the worst part. one man refused to go behind the fence, and he was arrested. his sister voiced her opinion about his arrest and she, too, was arrested. both of them were being non-violent, before, during, and after the arrest. the mans sign wasnt even threatening. it said “Bush must really love the poor, he made so many of us.” now is it just me, or does this seem rediculous? now to borrow a headline from a pittsburgh newspaper columnist, “Let’s have a moment of silence for the First Ammendment.”

You are right, sadly most governments only work in theory. I belive, however, that Democracy is the best we have right now. Man should keep moving forward, keep trying new things and new governments, and right now the best is Democracy. Yeah, America has problems (thanks to Bush) when it comes to true democracy, but at least in a democracy, one can live freely and have their own bankaccount, unlike conunisum where everyone shares everything.

Yeah, what a bummer- America was a Utopian paradise 'til he got elected. :unamused:

Phaedrus: “Yeah, what a bummer- America was a Utopian paradise 'til he got elected”

K: Utopian paradise? Uh, no. But one corrupt, inept, sleazy leader can
harm a democracy. Bush’s approval rating in three
different polls is below 40%. We are engaged in a seemingly
endless unnecessary war. A war that the GOP won’t even
allow hearings on, to investigate various allegations of bribes,
corruption, theft of billions (8.8 to be exact of U.S taxpayers money
that vanished in Iraq) What is the GOP afraid of?
Oh yah, the truth.

It took 4 years before Bush had created
one net job in his term. For perspective Clinton create 22 million
jobs in his 8 years.

It is readily apparent that bush is the worst president in
the last century. And that inept corruption has hurt democracy
in so many different ways. Under bush, we have secret gulags
in which we detain and torture people. Is this really the democracy
we want? Democracy is a fragile thing, and bush is damaging it,
perhaps beyond repair.

Kropotkin

Just so you know, there’s nothing exciting about throwing people out of a Presidential rally who are waving signs against the candidate. It’s common practice. At most of those events, they technically hand out tickets or invitations to people- so it’s a private event. Now, sometimes they are flexible about non-guests showing up, sometimes they aren’t. The important thing is, since there’s a guest list, if you act like an ass (like say, by protesting the candidate) they have grounds to toss you out. The Secret Service helping out with security at an incumbents rallies is also no big deal at all.

Oh please.
Are you familiar with the way government really works? Yes, there is corruption, and has been for as long as there has been government. People are corrupt. That won’t change. We can wish it would, and I truly do, but it won’t.
Many people think that Clinton was a great president. I’m not saying he wasn’t. But, a lot of things got credited to him that were not specifically his doing. Like, we have proof that the economic policies that come from a presidents term don’t really show effect in the economy until 3-4 years after implementation. Hence, some of the properity of the Clinton admin. was because of Bush I. And war does many things to change the scope of how this plays out. Maybe we should be in Iraq, maybe not. That’s not what the discussion is really about. Money disappears during wars. Wars are expensive. I’m sure this is not the first time that money has gone missing and allegations are made. But, in many wars, speaking out against the president isn’t done. So, how many times before this has the exact same thing happened, and we never heard one peep about it? No one can say for sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if it has happened several times.

Readily apparent? Hardly, FDR’s social programs hurt democracy far more than anything Bush II has done. They were a small fix in time of need, I don’t criticize necessarily the intent. But the long term impact has hindered the democratic process of America far more. A process that we put in place re-elected Bush II. That could be a whole other debate though. But, your jumping to these conclusions doesn’t serve to promote anything, but sitting around and whining. When is the last time we’ve had a president without scandal? I haven’t lived through one. I doubt that my mom has lived through one. The corrupt stay powerful by staying corrupt. Its a way of life.

Hello F(r)iends,

I came prepared to argue the merits of democracy and instead I find a “I hate Bush” thread.
Don’t we have a bunch of these? And at least those are appropriately titled.

-Thirst

Skydaemon:The corrupt stay powerful by staying corrupt. Its a way of life".

K: I guess even corruption now gets its own apologist.
How many officials were convicted of crimes during the
clinton years. ONE. Susan, ummmmm, can’t remember
her last name and that conviction was meant to force
her to make stuff up about clinton that could get him into
trouble. How many bush 2 officials will get indicted?
who knows because the white house and congress won’t
investigate anything. How many reagun and bush 1 officials were
convicted of something? Over 100. Corruption is a choice.
You choose to be corrupt. thus you can also choose not to be corrupt.
As the clinton years proved.

the argument that corruption will always be with us, is one
designed to allow corruption. I want and deserve a world without
corruption and it is possible. As long as we make the punishment fit
the crime. 20 years in federal prison will make people who prosper
by corruption think twice about it. Instead of the slap on the wrist they
get now. An official in Ohio admitted to tampering with the last
election and what did he get? probation. Probation for tampering with
an election. He should get 50 years in a federal prison.
If democracy and voting are the key elements for
the so called “greatest country on earth” Then we must treat
those elements as sacred. If not, hell put them up for sale.

Kropotkin

Thirst4:Hello F(r)iends,
I came prepared to argue the merits of democracy and instead
I find a “I hate Bush” thread.
Don’t we have a bunch of these? And at least those are appropriately titled".

K: a nice theoretical discussion of democracy without
actual examples is kinda like priest talking about sex with
a married couple. He is talking about the soul and sex is about
the body. You cannot have a nice theoretical discussion about democracy. it only works with examples of democracy in action.
and the example we have right now is bush. sooooooo…
what do you want?

Kropotkin

you cant avoid corruption simply by changing the form of government. anyone can be corrupt. However, if your trying to minimize the effect of corruption i think democracy is the way to go. Having a few corrupt individuals with checks and balances to hold against thoes inidviduals is better then say a corrupt dictator where nothing can stop them short of revolt.

Dont get me wrong, im 100% for dictatorship.

Listen to me you fucknuts; I am your fucking president. Do you fucking understand me? If you don’t want a fucking democracy, then get the fuck out of my country you fuck. Go live in fucking Afghanistan or someshit.

Now now Georgie; as your mother I am obliged to intervene. Get your fucking ass back to your bed or i’ll fucking spank you, you little shit.

Fuck off Mum. I’ll do what I want. Im a big boy now - have you not seen the size of my penis as of late?

Hello F(r)iends,

Kropotkin: I grant you that Presidents and various leaders have the power to influence democracy. However, democracy is more than about the President. It is about the people, it is about choice, it is about progress, it is about the learning curve, it is about compromise, it is about so much more than just the President. What do I want? I want to discuss how Americans have failed to agree, how Americans have failed to unite themselves, et al. If there is a problem with our democracy, then it is because the people are failing to unite. So much for “united we stand.”

Also, I want to reiterate thatt democracy does not fail at the whim of one man, even if that man is the President.

There are plenty of other examples in democracy that could show the failure or success in the system. Now we could talk about some of the stuff that I mentioned and a lot more, but I stand by my original post which is that this thread is simply about “I Hate Bush” claims. The last three or so posts seem to indicate what I am talking about…

-Thirst

Idiots.

I was trying to make a similar point but got sidetracked. Happens sometimes.

Corruption happens. But we have the power to do something about it. There have been many things that we could discuss about, but Bush II hating has been the top of the list. Why? The merits and flaws of the current democratic system is a more encompassing and enlightening topic.

Bush II is not the worst president we’ve ever had. So, let’s stop talking about one man and talk about the benefits or criticism of the system itself and the people (and all of them) who use the system.

Thirst

I’m with you on this one. This could have been a thread, but instead it’s a public space for those who are apparently retarded to not even attempt to construct an informed and considered opinion…

As a point of note directly related to the first post:

To reiterate what Uccisore said, Presidential Rallies are technically invite-only. I’ve been to several. They (the holders of the rally) have the right to remove people from the premise. These people were not removed from the premise, merely asked to stay in a certain area.

To put it in other terms: I buy a ticket to some concert. I’m allowed to go in on good faith that I won’t be disruptive or cause problems. My friend who doesn’t buy a ticket cannot enter, not even on good faith. If I should cause a disturbance, even as a ticket bearer, the event holders have a right to remove me from the premise. My ticket doesn’t give me the “right” to attend, but merely the “priviledge.”

In this case, the protesters were allowed to stay at the event, just in a certain location, on good faith. When they refused to do as asked, as people who were likely not technically invited to the event, they were removed from the premise.

This isn’t a breach of the First Ammendment. Those people were being allowed to protest peacefully at an event that, while being public, was likely by invitation. As non-ticket holders, it was their duty to respect the wishes of those holding the event.

As a personal request, could you post a couple of links regarding the incident so I can further investigate it?

~LDG

exactly.

Rule by force can give you nothing less.

What good is power if you can’t abuse it?

If you were in the same posistion, wouldn’t you favor those who please you, and dis-favor those who told you to jump in a lake?

It all stems from a violation of this maxim.

Democracy can’t succede when it creates the seeds of it’s own demise.

Are you talking about anything in particular that was brought up in this thread, anarchist?