is the west really democratic as it says?

over the fast few years things have been coming to light

1. over 500,000 votes regected slash not allowed in the US (bush is realected)
2. the case of blair and his cash for peerages,
and so forth where polititions have used money to get into high positions excetra
by promising high reqrds for the benifactors.

is this what democracy is?
where who has the money controls everything not the people that are supposidly electing their heads of state.

democracy a great trade

edit: if this is in the wronge place just move it if its been done before lock it

[edit on 13-7-2006 by bodrul]

A post! Woohoo

Democracy in the West is a charade. The level of disenfranchisment has risen sharply in the last 6 or 7 years. But is democracy really what we should be aspiring to? Democracy is a very easily hijacked system of government.

A republic is about the best form of government devised, shouldnt that tradition be what we aspire to? However neither a democracy or a republic will ever represent its people whilst the masses are apathetic or uneducated and also without a free press.

We as citizens of the West have to bare most of the responsibility for the state of our nations. We have allowed, through our apathy, our governments to transform into quasi-facist dictatorships. If we had bothered to look away from the TV long enough to give a damn we could of stopped it from happening.

Also the majority of those who were interested in the affairs of the nation got their information from tainted and wholly biased corporate news sources.

The only hope we have is that the burgeoning alternative media on the internet can claim 51% of the masses minds and help rectify and restore our nations back to their original paths. Failing that we are doomed to a fate we actually deserve, a fully fledged and entrenched facist dictatorship.

[edit on 13/7/06 by subz]

As churchill said, its the worst system of government we have, except for all those other ones.

posted by subz

Democracy in the West is a charade. We as citizens of the West have to bare most of the responsibility for the state of our nations. We have allowed, through our apathy, our governments to transform into quasi-facist dictatorships. Edited by Don W]

Subz, your report on what has happened is right on, but it is not entirely due to voter apathy. A large part comes from the improved accuracy of polling. Polls cannot tell the future. But polls are highly accurate in describing the present. Another contributor is propaganda. Shrewd and calculating speech writers can “push” people in any direction. The third leg of this electoral milking stool is: demographics - accurately identifying ever smaller population groupings - form the underlying scientific basis for the new vote-driven politics we have seen rising since the 1960s. Voter naivete was as important as voter apathy.

If we had bothered to look away from the TV long enough to give a damn we could of stopped it from happening . . the majority of those who were interested in the affairs of the nation got their information from tainted and wholly biased corporate news sources . .

Who said “Give them circus!” Again, while I too lament this sad state of affairs, it is not new. I have urged CFR - Campaign Finance Reform - as the simplistic solution to a complex problem. My vision is NO private money can be spent in any public election. The Supreme Court got us here in the 2 cases which overruled the only serious effort to reform the financing of our elections since Reconstruction. Congress is off the hook and the Executive Branch does not care one whit.

The only hope we have is the alternative media on the internet can claim 51% of the masses minds and help rectify and restore our nations back to their original paths. Failing that we are doomed to a fate we actually deserve, a fully fledged and entrenched facist dictatorship.

I regret to remind you the 80% or more of the internet bandwidth is either outright invention or is so heavy biased that it will take a subscription to “The Nation” and some other low circulation publications to “clue” us in. In 2004, it was obvious that “Board Distractors” were employed by political groups to prevent serious political discussions. Sort of an Internet Swift Boat 527.

Buckley v. Valeo
www.firstamendmentcenter.org...
New York Times v. Sullivan
www.bc.edu...


[edit on 7/14/2006 by donwhite]

A very good post Donwhite

Alas I am not Egyptian but British living in Australia.

donwhite.... that is so true. and iv'e always said it.

i dont know who thought of this system of election funding, but im betting it might of been the same people that fight to see the federal reserve act renewed rather than vitoed.

The Premier of Alberta (canada) Ralf Klein, refused to spend money campaigning for re-election, he didn't even make a speach. and still won. His intire opposition spit flames saying that he is "disrespecting the election process"

i do want to give u a serious reply as i am a chinese and lived in uk for 4 years, i think america's view on some democratic issue is more radical than uk and tell you the truth, no matter democratic or not, any country have its biased colour when it sees other country's political system especially western media is famous of make the issue they interested big and elimilite the issue they feel embrassement small even gone.

personal view: if u think it is then it is, if you think it's not then it's not, the point is a country's constitution has to be fair and up to the country's capability. about democratic or blar blar blar...just excuse used by politicians when they needed