Hey Jay - thank you for the response! I like what you're saying, about how it's personal and collective, if I understand correctly. I wonder - what if the vote is not what you want for your future? Or what if the vote is what you want but not what others want for theirs?
Democratic freedom is not letting the few and the powerful out influence the votes of the many.
The “tyranny of the majority” it was once referred to as. If you have a personal cause and it looses you have to redouble your efforts and try again. This begins the concept of lobbying and creating interest groups. The idea of advocacy in a democracy is complicated and leads to a lot of confusion corruption and influence pedaling. But things like the voting rights act has taken over 80’years to be ratified state by state. So even if the congressional representatives approve something, the states can resist in a democratic system that counteracts the democratic process
So sales and spin are always a part of a modern democracy. Government control is critical to keep money from creating the outsized influencing of human rights.
Oh , forgot this. Democracy is about compromise. If you can’t compromise between parties , you cannot form a ruling coalition, that’s just basic government 101.
I can understand that. If democracy were about not letting the few and powerful out influence the votes of the many, and let's hypothetically say democracy worked perfectly, to the point where there was no concern for tyranny of the majority, would you still need it? Or is democracy a means to an end? If so, I wonder what is that end?
In other words, votes aside, what does democracy do for you as a human being?
The freedom to determine your own future by popular vote.
Hey Jay - thank you for the response! I like what you're saying, about how it's personal and collective, if I understand correctly. I wonder - what if the vote is not what you want for your future? Or what if the vote is what you want but not what others want for theirs?
Ah that’s the rub. This is harder.
Democratic freedom is not letting the few and the powerful out influence the votes of the many.
The “tyranny of the majority” it was once referred to as. If you have a personal cause and it looses you have to redouble your efforts and try again. This begins the concept of lobbying and creating interest groups. The idea of advocacy in a democracy is complicated and leads to a lot of confusion corruption and influence pedaling. But things like the voting rights act has taken over 80’years to be ratified state by state. So even if the congressional representatives approve something, the states can resist in a democratic system that counteracts the democratic process
So sales and spin are always a part of a modern democracy. Government control is critical to keep money from creating the outsized influencing of human rights.
Oh , forgot this. Democracy is about compromise. If you can’t compromise between parties , you cannot form a ruling coalition, that’s just basic government 101.
I can understand that. If democracy were about not letting the few and powerful out influence the votes of the many, and let's hypothetically say democracy worked perfectly, to the point where there was no concern for tyranny of the majority, would you still need it? Or is democracy a means to an end? If so, I wonder what is that end?
In other words, votes aside, what does democracy do for you as a human being?