Your Perfect World

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Allow me to introduce to you your prefect world. Unfortunately, however, the world cannot exist in this perfect setup in which I am about to describe, and so your perfect world, in actuality, cannot exist.

The problems I see with my own world – a little nation sometimes referred to as the U.S.A. – are twofold: an indirect democracy and the unclear fashion in which politics as a whole works. If there is a way to solve such problems – and there is – my world can exist perfectly. Of course, though, I am ignoring a whole host of other issues that halt a perfect society from existing, but I will be addressing these two problems because these are what we commonly discuss on these boards. The real problem, though, is that solving these problems creates an even more complex society and one that would not work very well.

To solve the first problem – an indirect democracy – we should obviously do the exact opposite because, as everyone knows, democracy is best in situations. A society where every vote is counted and added to a final total is perfect since it lets every person’s opinion directly count. Without going on rants that just reiterates what we all know, I will now go on to point out why such a setup cannot work.

This seemingly perfect situation is extremely problematic because we will need a public database where we – every person who votes – can make sure that not only the outcome of any particular election is actually what the media says it is, but also that our vote actually was accounted for in any said election. This applies to any vote for anything, and not just political elections. The point by solving the problem in this way is to make sure the people do not think for one second that an election’s outcome is not what actually the case is and that their votes are not accounted for. People not trusting their political process is a huge problem in my society and the only way this can be healed is by making public every voter’s choice in every election so that the people can determine for themselves that elections are truthful and that their votes are really counted.

Now this, obviously, will never happen because then the entire purpose of voting – a very private process by definition – is undermined. Who would participate in a public vote? What would be the results of public voting? Violent feuds not limited to violent crimes? Obviously, this would never work since people are angered very quickly.

Let’s move on to the second problem – the unclear fashion in which politics as a whole works. We are all amazed at how rapidly my society’s government makes decisions, especially the major ones, such as going to war. We are all amazed also at how we – the people of this society – seem to not have a say in such major decisions. This is how the politics are very unclear in this society. To solve this problem, this society will need to make every decision it attempts to make public to the people and have the people vote on every decision. This will make the political processes transparent and will make people feel that they have a say in their society’s destiny, which is what we would all love.

The problem with this seemingly perfect situation is that, if this way is to be successful, the society must vote on every matter no matter how big or small. The purpose of this is to make the people feel powerful, and so they must vote on everything. Imagine how long it would take to make critical decisions if it must be put on hold until everyone voted! How would extremely sensitive decisions be made? Consider this: there is a terrorist cell working in New York City and the government desires to take them out. The government sets up an online election and states something like, “There is a terrorist cell currently working in New York City. Should we act to stop them?” Guess what would happen? The terrorists would successfully evade capture because they become aware that they are being spied on. Of course, though, this is a very ludicrous example, but my point remains – the political process must be made transparent and the people must vote on everything by knowing all of the facts in order to make informed decisions.

This is your perfect world. A world in which we all publicly vote on things and a world where the political process is slowed down because it is extremely transparent and gives the people a chance to vote on everything by giving them all of the facts. Are you willing to accept this world? Or are you inclined to desire more the one in which we have here now? Would you accept a middle ground? Let’s discuss!




posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
With all due respect, my issue this projection of a perfect is simply this: Since when are people right? Even assuming a society in which information is presented and consumed unformly, as humans, we allow our own experiences to tinge our decisions. While I believe democracies on the whole are a justifiable entity, any society built on its foundations can never be perfect, simply because we are biased.

Now, functionally, as you say, given the unlikely scenario that every single issue was voted on, may seem fair on the surface. But it would be incredibly burdensome, and I'll go as far as saying that voting would be marginal.

Despite all this, it was an interesting read, thank you.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oscitate
Despite all this, it was an interesting read, thank you.


Thanks for the very nice comment! Yes, humans are biased and so this system might not be perfect due to this as well - good point!



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by they see ALL
 


"If the world was perfect, it wouldn't be."
- Yogi Berra

Peace.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveForever8
"If the world was perfect, it wouldn't be."
- Yogi Berra


Ain't that the truth!





new topics
 
0

log in

join