virus: Democracy in America (was re:Nader)

From: Jake Sapiens (every1hz@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Feb 28 2004 - 00:01:53 MST

  • Next message: Mermaid: "virus: Re:Tower of Brahma"

     
    It makes for an interesting argument. After thumbing through a few
    dictionaries it seems that "republic" and "democracy" have a lot of
    overlapping usage. I would still say we are a democracy in the sense that
    we choose our political leaders on the basis of elections. However our
    last presidential election has clearly shown us how some very undemocratic
    rules such as the electoral college, and winner take all state electoral
    votes, operate to effectively nullify the choice of the majority which
    democracy is supposed to be all about. Removing either anti-democratic
    rule would have made Al Gore the undisputed victor by significant margins.

    In addition to robbing the majority of their choice, these rules also act
    to diminish dialogue in presidential elections. If we actually had a
    majority rule (with runoffs when necessary), third party and independent
    candidates would not serve primarily as spoilers. Hence it puts people who
    ordinarily should be welcoming Ralph Nader's point of view (liberal
    democrats) in the position of spurning and criticizing him for spoiling the
    balance. In a normal majority rule democracy he and other third party and
    independent candidates would serve to bring more new voters into the system
    without risking the perverse anti-democratic results of handing the
    election to the least liked of the two major candidates, as it did in the
    last election. We would have simply had a runoff like normal democracies
    do.

    The current presidential election system, generally acts to discourage any
    voices other than the two major parties, as well as discouraging people to
    vote. If you are a Democrat in Texas, or a Republican in California
    (Arnold changes nothing yet), or a Green anywhere, your vote for president
    effectively counts for nothing in the current system. In this respect the
    presidential election system of the US serves to actively discourage people
    from voting. This being the biggest media event of US politics, it has a
    significant tendency to discourage people from voting in other smaller
    elections as well. Though I have my doubts about requiring people to vote
    as they do in Australia, I certainly find it hypocritical that a nation of
    people who like to call themselves a "democracy" maintain an arcane system
    that actually serves to discourage people from voting.

    -Jake

    > [Original Message]
    > From: Erik Aronesty <erik@zoneedit.com>
    > To: <virus@lucifer.com>
    > Date: 02/24/2004 6:00:49 AM
    > Subject: Re: virus: Re:Nader.
    >
    > NOTE: the U.S. is not a Democracy. It's a Republic.
    > ---
    > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
    <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

    --- Jake Sapiens
    --- every1hz@earthlink.net
    --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.

    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 27 2004 - 21:59:42 MST