Originally posted by aLLeKs
You people in the USA dont have a democracy.
Right. It's supposed to be a Republic, not a Democracy. ...and I'm not even sure if it could still be considered a Republic. The 17th amendment,
and other things, have long since chiseled away at the Republic framework, changing it towards a popular democracy. All hail the Mob, may it rule
Seriously, are the most Americans that lazy?
Not to read and inform themselves about the candidates?
Well, we have this thing called the Public Education System, which, despite its name, seems to be a mechanism for ensuring that kids can reach legal
adulthood without knowing how to read or do basic arithmetic(much less actual math). It also instills a distaste for "education" by basically
making the whole 'school' experience a negative one in most regards, while at the same time enforcing a mandatory attendance policy until a certain
age, thereby implying that education is something that can be "completed."
Possibly the last two things are done in self-defense; if people actually liked learning and went on to purposefully educate themselves after leaving
the public school systems, it wouldn't take long for them to realize what a joke the system is as a whole.
So to answer your question: no, most people do not "read and inform themselves," because it smacks of studying, which they learned to hate, thanks
to Public Education.
A two party system is simply no democracy, you can only chose who will be the new warlord.
Once again I say it is not supposed to be a democracy. It's supposed to be a Republic. However, I see your point about "choosing the new
warlord," but it seems to me that no matter how many "parties" a system has, a voter will always be choosing between different "warlords." You
don't rise to the top of a party hierarchy by being a mild-mannered milquetoast. You get there by kicking everyone else's ass before they kick
Also you have to get rid of the lobby! You should strictly seperate politics and companies interests.
This is a very interesting and good-sounding idea, but please explain to me how it is possible in execution? Maybe I'm slow, or I'm missing
something, but I don't see how money and politics can be separated in practice.
If there would not be written "this candidate is a republican/democrat" 70% would not know who they should vote for. The candidates are all
the same only the party "sounds" different. There are some people who would simply vote republican no matter if the candidate would have democratic
an liberal views as long as he is from the republican party. I do not understand this
I totally agree with this and it annoys me no end. There have been attempts in the past to remove the (R) and (D) tags from the names on some
ballots, in the hopes that people would either attempt to educate themselves before voting or, at the very least, abstain from putting marks down for
names they didn't recognize. So far none of the attempts have been successful, the parties have shouted them down every time.
I hope my English was understandable... It is 4 o'clock in the morning here in Germany and I really have problems at this time to get my
Your written English is excellent. I wish I could say the same for many of my fellow Americans.