Does democracy work?

[JaKael02]

What will the outcome be then?

Either a dictatorship of relativism (currently occuring)
or
Could be something as severe as the events in Old Testament (Assyrian captivity, Babylonian captivity, Alexander conquest, Roman conquest, etc.)
or
Great Chastisement (Marian prophecies)
or
Aggressive persecution via secular leaders - motivated by agnostic/atheist society which is increasingly viewing Christians as hostile to their lifestyle.

Thoughts?

James

 

[Andromedus]

Either a dictatorship of relativism (currently occuring)
or
Could be something as severe as the events in Old Testament (Assyrian captivity, Babylonian captivity, Alexander conquest, Roman conquest, etc.)
or
Great Chastisement (Marian prophecies)
or
Aggressive persecution via secular leaders - motivated by agnostic/atheist society which is increasingly viewing Christians as hostile to their lifestyle.

Thoughts?

James

Well, if the first alternative is like it is now but added with a worse situation regarding abortion etc. I would guess that the dictatorship of relativism is the most likely alternative. Much of the world is already like that, including the US. It all depends though on what you mean with dictatorship of relativism. But I get the idea and moral relativism is not something I am fond of.

 

[manualman]

China is a hard case. But how much more tryannical are they than the current western governments? There is actually a good deal of economic and social freedom in China. In some ways more than in the US.

The problem in China is the repressive and tyrannical government. You cannot seriously wonder if they are close to similar levels of tyranny. If you were Chinese and typed this sort of criticism on a forum there and got caught your family would potentially receive a bill from Beijing for the $1.25 they spent on your bullet. The one now lodged in your brain. In America, you get funny looks if you have more than 3 kids. In China, you get kidnapped and a forcible abortion if you have more than one. Don’t bother arguing that our government is anything like theirs.

The problems you note (and exaggerate) in US government behavior arise from the collapse in backbone of our people, not a structural problem in the governmental model.

 

[exnihilo]

What will cause this radical change?

The realities of economic collapse. Much less likely an awakening. But God’s wrath could also be the cause.

The problem in China is the repressive and tyrannical government. You cannot seriously wonder if they are close to similar levels of tyranny. If you were Chinese and typed this sort of criticism on a forum there and got caught your family would potentially receive a bill from Beijing for the $1.25 they spent on your bullet. The one now lodged in your brain. In America, you get funny looks if you have more than 3 kids. In China, you get kidnapped and a forcible abortion if you have more than one. Don’t bother arguing that our government is anything like theirs.

The problems you note (and exaggerate) in US government behavior arise from the collapse in backbone of our people, not a structural problem in the governmental model.

Yes I do seriously wonder. I have to admit I’m no expert on China and have never even been there. But I do know folks who do business there and are familiar with the East. Their experiences there don’t seem so terrible as one might imagine based on how some people describe China. Have you been to China? Where does your experience of China come from?

China may well perform forced abortions. I do not know how extensive they are. That would certainly be an outrage. But a lot of abortions are performed in the US. Any abortion is a grave evil. How many fathers are deprived their child by women who have the sole right to abort? How is that any better than the government forcing a woman to endure an abortion? If forced medical treatment is the problem well that happens in America too.

The reason I say China is a mixed case is because it is easy to find ways China is terrible but the US can be terrible in other ways. How do you compare different evils? China isn’t engaged in wars like the US. War is a pretty terrible thing as well.

It seems we do agree the American people are weak. They prefer comfort over principle, and the leaders know that. If the type of people Americans are is not suited to the government we have then that government must not be the ideal government. At best it could be the ideal government for a certain kind of people. We can also say this form of government can not stop the people from becoming such that this government is a bad form for those people.

 

[THP]

Democracies problems are also systemic. A problem is democracy tends to favor the present over the future. Politicians are interested in getting elected, which leads them to favor solutions that seem beneficial in the present but that have long term negative consequences. It is the same problem the corporation has, which is also a social ill. Monarchy and private business tend to favor the future. The heirs are always there to exert pressure. They will encourage actions that have the best long term benefit.

This is exactly why the 17th amendment (popular election of senators) was a horrible idea and why we need to maintain the electoral college. I still think a federalist representative republic based on the rule of law provides the most freedom for individuals and prevents oppressive governments. Unfortunately due to a severe deficiency in education we are giving away our freedoms.

Personally I think the greatest danger of democracy is the people thinking that the government is them when it is not. This leads to people seeing the success of the state as being equivalent to their success. This is most dangerous in war. And not surprisingly the democratic forms of government have been the most violent, deadly and totally destructive as attested to by the 20th century. When it was the king’s army people were more wary of war.

I’m going to have to disagree. By far the most destructive governments are communistic: Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. Its not even close. In fact, considering the immense military power of the US its pretty remarkable how peaceful we are.

 

[manualman]

Have you been to China? Where does your experience of China come from?

Several sources.

1. I read rather a lot.
2. I have half a dozen friends who have adopted Chinese children. All girls, by the way. Girls are the one abandoned in China since many people want their ‘one child’ to be boy.
3. I know a priest who served undercover in China for a while before his cover was blown and he had to leave. He has some amazing stories of the regular people he came to know and the unimaginably repressive government patterns of spying on their own people. Nobody I know worries about the FBI showing up at their door the way the Chinese worry about state security showing up at theirs. (Not even me, and I’ve actually HAD the FBI show up at my door and question me before!)
4. It’s a widely known fact that the Chinese government is quite polite and cooperative with foreigners from whom they hope to profit. Foreign businessmen (and adoptive parents, for that matter) are shown a sanitized version of China. The one the government WANTS them to see.

 

[JaKael02]

Well, if the first alternative is like it is now but added with a worse situation regarding abortion etc. I would guess that the dictatorship of relativism is the most likely alternative. Much of the world is already like that, including the US. It all depends though on what you mean with dictatorship of relativism. But I get the idea and moral relativism is not something I am fond of.

Dictatorship because it has become popular opinion.

Dictatorships of Nazism and Marxism stood against popular opinion. And thus could be destroyed once you remove the military.

However, our dictatorship cannot be removed by force. But must be removed from within and changing popular opinion.

Just some thoughts.

James

 

[exnihilo]

This is exactly why the 17th amendment (popular election of senators) was a horrible idea and why we need to maintain the electoral college. I still think a federalist representative republic based on the rule of law provides the most freedom for individuals and prevents oppressive governments. Unfortunately due to a severe deficiency in education we are giving away our freedoms.

I agree. The senators were supposed to represent the interest of the state’s and not the people directly. The senate as it is now makes no sense. The electoral college was also designed to have the presidency represent state interests.

I’m going to have to disagree. By far the most destructive governments are communistic: Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. Its not even close. In fact, considering the immense military power of the US its pretty remarkable how peaceful we are.

I agree that the communist governments have been the most deadly in terms of number of people killed. Of course you have to remember that the US was allies with one of the most deadly of these, the Soviet Empire.

Several sources…

Both of us have indirect knowledge. And even if we had direct knowledge our knowledge would be incomplete. I’m not saying that China is paradise. I’ll still stand on China having in some ways more economic freedom than the US, which you have not really challenged. The social freedom comment I’ll retract.

 

[aragonjohn1]

I oppose democracy in principle because I think it’s bad in practice and lousy in theory. Historically it arises from a number of specious philosophical assumptions, opposition to which right-minded Catholics ought to be committed. It encourages the horrible, turgid, offensive enshrinement and worship of “freedom” as the highest good. etc. etc.

But even so, I suppose a right-minded Catholic democracy would be preferable to an atheist monarchy. Still, a right-minded Catholic monarchy would be best of all.

I agree

 

[irishOntarian]

Really, almost any government system will work if people are holy. And none will work if they aren’t. Democracy seems like a good idea because it invites people to take responsibility for the good of their country, but if you’ve ever read The Princess and Curdie by George MacDonald, it could lead you to reflect that a society like ours might be better off under a good, moral despotism

 

[JaKael02]

I agree that the communist governments have been the most deadly in terms of number of people killed. Of course you have to remember that the US was allies with one of the most deadly of these, the Soviet Empire.

You could include abortions for the US! That might change the statistics.

Minimum of 40,000,000 since 1972. Not including morning-after-pill, etc.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Democracy has not worked at all. The respect for human dignity and rights has gone out the window when the principles of “majority rule” and “common good” trump individual rights. This seems inevitable with democracy. Furthermore, we have the issue of politicians that have very short terms. Because of this, they have a very short vision. They do not care about the long term effects of their programs, only what benefits them while they are in office. Is it any surprise, then, that debt and unfunded liabilities are through the roof? On the other hand, with monarchy or hereditary rule, politicians have an interest in the long term viability of a country because that would directly benefit them and their offspring.

Not that I support monarchy. I support more of a natural order.

 

[tafan]

We are a fallen people. There is no system of government that will always work. All of them will break down and fail at times. Some of the forms, eg democracies, monarchies, constitutional monarchies, have worked quite well in certain times and places.

Looking for the perfect system of government is an excersice in futiility IMO. We should look to make what we have work as good as possible, and when that is impossible we should look for a system to replace it that fits the circumstances.

 

[austenbosten]

Yes, any form of government works…as long as you describe what “working” means?

For example one could argue that Despotism works wonderfully. The North Koreans have held power for many years without fear of revolt. Sure the people are starving and have no rights, but the Kim Jong family and military bureaucracy has benefited well from Despotism.

Monarchy works very well in Saudi Arabia…sure non-Moslems are persecuted and women have low civil-rights, but the Saudi family has benefited greatly from this form of government.

Democracy is wonderful because it pits people against each other and can lead to majority tyrannies.

This is why the American Founding Fathers were right in having a Federal Constitutional Republic. If you look to America as to why it’s failing, look at how the US Constitution has been changed from what the FF’s envisioned. We have drastically expanded suffrage, removed State’s representation by modifying Senate elections through the 17th Amendment, changing voting laws to allow people who many do not pay taxes a vote, and of course the gross expansion of Executive powers.

You could say despotism and democracy are responsible for America’s decline.

Just my :twocents:

 

[tafan]

austenbosten:

Yes, any form of government works…as long as you describe what “working” means?

For example one could argue that Despotism works wonderfully. The North Koreans have held power for many years without fear of revolt. Sure the people are starving and have no rights, but the Kim Jong family and military bureaucracy has benefited well from Despotism

Well, a catholic cannot argue what you suggest. We have the Church’s guidance to tell us what “working” means with respect to government. A smattering of paragraphs from the CCC shows us that no Catholic can argue that depostism works wonferfully, in particular North Korean depotism.

1910 Each human community possesses a common good which permits it to be recognized as such; it is in the political community that its most complete realization is found. It is the role of the state to defend and promote the common good of civil society, its citizens, and intermediate bodies.

2372 The state has a responsibility for its citizens’ well-being. In this capacity it is legitimate for it to intervene to orient the demography of the population. This can be done by means of objective and respectful information, but certainly not by authoritarian, coercive measures. The state may not legitimately usurp the initiative of spouses, who have the primary responsibility for the procreation and education of their children.162 In this area, it is not authorized to employ means contrary to the moral law.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation

1883 Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which "a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.

2499 Moral judgment must condemn the plague of totalitarian states which systematically falsify the truth, exercise political control of opinion through the media, manipulate defendants and witnesses at public trials, and imagine that they secure their tyranny by strangling and repressing everything they consider “thought crimes”

2431 The responsibility of the state. "Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. . . . Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society.

 

[austenbosten]

Well, a catholic cannot argue what you suggest. We have the Church’s guidance to tell us what “working” means with respect to government. A smattering of paragraphs from the CCC shows us that no Catholic can argue that depostism works wonferfully, in particular North Korean depotism.

True but I read some Catholics arguing for a Monarchy, which is a form of Despotism. I’m just pointing out this who question of “Does Democracy Work?” is pointless, unless we establish what “working” means.

If it means utopia, then no. Democracy doesn’t work, neither will any other form of government, because utopia is a failed concept. Also why seek to create a utopia; do we somehow believe we can create a Heaven on earth?

 

[john78]

The reason why i ask such a question is due to the fact that as i reflect on the world in general and look at how democracy has shaped modern society i wonder does it actually work the way so many envisioned especially Christian’s. It seems that in today’s world everything has become relative because of democracy, fundamental value’s that were instrumental in structuring our society have been turned upside down with the introduction of abortion, same sex marriage, euthanasia etc and all because a majority say’s so. The problem with democracy is that because the common person hold’s such power then they can easily be manipulated by those with wealth, power and influence to embrace whatever ideology they desire. Maybe it’s also more to do with the “political party system” which Chester Belloc criticized claiming it would lead to a servile state. Political parties compete against each other coming out with spectacular promises if they get into government only to put most manpower and resource’s into protecting their own interest’s.

Also because the people are so easily swayed socially then as they decay morally this is reflected in the government elected and therefore it’s incompetence to run a nation the way it should be run. Everything such as education, economic’s, social issues etc is affected for generation’s. It just doesn’t seem right to me especially as a Catholic. It’s not that i don’t have faith in democracy, it’s just that i think it should be in another form. What do other’s think?

It works when people with morals and values use those morals and values to protect and serve the democratic process.

I think the problem we have now is that we have such a corrupt two party system, and institutes that are corrupt that inturn breed more corruption for those entering into politics that those few honest men and women with values and morals that are apart of what founded this country based on a Judao Christian society, are now out numbered or perhaps they are out numbered and feel that they are too weak to make an impact.

I don’t honestly think this country has been over run to an extreme as of yet, the problem is those that are in positions of power who run on corruption are speaking and acting louder at times than those with values and morals.

We finally saw some with in the Catholic Church finally speak up in regards to Obama and his health care take over with the sly abortion slipped in upon Catholics…

In order to get more honest politicians it starts from the ground up, parents have to instill strong values in children, future teachers for grade schools, and universities/ that need to have better values and morals, and not be afraid to stand up for what is honest when the time calls.

Democracy works it is just those of us with common sense, morals, and values do not always think we can make a difference, and if we just speak up more often and hold the line, and force politicians to be accountable for their corrupt actions then the tide swings from a corrupt two party system, to something more in line with what can be better for the future.

It will never be perfect, but it would be nice to know and see that politicians can and will be held accountable at all times, and that they take a very big risk in acting corrupt, more so than every pot head who gets pickd up every day and jailed for being high.

I wonder the ratio for drug users being arrested versus politicians who have committed fraud being arrested, how billions of dollars can just disapear and everyone says, hmm, well time to get ready for the next election campaign.

I would like to see politicians on the same salary level as our EMTs, Firefighters,Police,and Military, if not just a bit less. They really do not deserve a dime in my opinion to be doing what they are doing.

 

[tafan]

True but I read some Catholics arguing for a Monarchy, which is a form of Despotism. I’m just pointing out this who question of “Does Democracy Work?” is pointless, unless we establish what “working” means.

If it means utopia, then no. Democracy doesn’t work, neither will any other form of government, because utopia is a failed concept. Also why seek to create a utopia; do we somehow believe we can create a Heaven on earth?

Well, I was usinga bad definition of despotism when I said “no Catholic can argue that depostism works wonferfully, in particular North Korean depotism”. I was referring to the type in communist or tyrranical dictators;and that was not accurate. There have certainly been some monarchies that have worked.

But my main point is, that we have established for us what “working” means. The Church teaches us that.

 

[seekerz]

Democracy does work. Many people just get upset when their views don’t rule the day. That’s part of what it means to be grown up - accepting the outcome of elections. If you don’t like who’s voted in, your option lies in convincing others to your viewpoint - not in chucking the baby out with the bath water.

 

[tafan]

Democracy does work. Many people just get upset when their views don’t rule the day. That’s part of what it means to be grown up - accepting the outcome of elections. If you don’t like who’s voted in, your option lies in convincing others to your viewpoint - not in chucking the baby out with the bath water.

That is quite an absolute statement. How do you think it worked in Germany in 1933? Just grow up and accept the outcome of the election as being the workings of democracy when Hitler gets voted into power? And how did that democratic event fair with respect to the responsibilities of government that the Church teaches us (see my above post)?

Again, no form of government always works. Several forms of government have worked in a given time and place.