posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 08:57 PM
Of course. The USA was made to be a constitutional republic, but it has become a democracy, which is a tyranny of the mob. Theoretically, the
Constitution is supposed to be the supreme law of the land, so certain things can't be voted on, particularly things protected by the Bill of
The problem is that democracy is eroding these rights.
First, only landowners over 21 could vote. Then the people complained and had the vote extended to any man over 21, extending the vote to the poor
(prone to demanding social services from the government), and the fiscally irresponsible (prone to being stupid).
Then, the women wanted to vote. In itself this wasn't a bad thing, but women have a tendency to behave like mothers. (Please don't shoot me Sexism
Police) This made it more likely to elect politicians more likely to give the poor and fiscally irresponsible what they want.
Then, they let the 18-21 group vote. As those on the left side are fond of saying (when complaining about military service anyway), the brain isn't
fully developed until around age 25, so obviously some additional level of immaturity is introduced by letting these people vote, and immature people
in general don't always make good choices. These three expansions in the franchise have led to a degradation of our government.
Is it fair to restrict voting? That's not the point. The USA is not supposed to be a democracy! This nation was founded with the
purpose of protecting liberty, in which the government was prohibited from doing a great many things, and generally expected to leave people alone.
Too much democracy will only mess that up.
The Democrats and Republicans are both working to keep themselves in power. Even though the Republicans are generally perceived as slightly more
libertarian than the Democrats, in reality the GOP is too weak to do very much in reversing any government expansion, if it tries at all.
Three party systems sound more stable than a two party system, but what we really need is to get the two dominant parties to let other parties play
with them. Michael Badnarik and Ralph Nader were both barred from debating with Bush and Kerry, and that is wrong. Badnarik got on almost all of
the states' ballots (maybe all of them), and Nader got most of the states.
Three party systems tend not to last -- when the dominant two parties start behaving badly, a new party is brought in or one splits in two, and then
people choose between three parties for a few years until one is sifted out.