Is Democracy naturally CORRUPT?

[charles brough]

A study was announced in MSN news in March of 2007 titled "Corporate Political Contributions and Stock Returns." The study found that the average corporation that gives money to a large number of Federal election candidates pays out to them on average each election year a total of only $100,000 but reaps such benefit that its stock price shows a 2.5% better annual improvement on average over all the other stocks on the stock exchanges.

If the practice were illegal, it would come under the title of bribery; but by it being legal, it is not considered in the States to be a corrupt practice. In such ways, Americans position ourselves to criticize government corruption in other countries---such as Russia, China, Palestine, Indonesia and all the others---while claiming for ourselves the “high moral ground.”

This may fool the American people, but does it fool the rest of the world? Perhaps they see through it enough that the American ideals of “democracy” and “free enterprise” are losing their luster. Where ever it is applied, it is corrupt. If corruption is doing this to our secular ideals and, for that reason, are unable to spread---even to be successfully imposed in Afghanistan and Iraq---what goals and ideals are there for the world's people to give purpose and hope to them? What else but to turn back to their old and by now obsolete religions?

Thus, we see inside the workings of social evolution, that is, the process by which past civilizations, and those of the present, that have all risen, have then all, also declined . . .

[Mike C]

Charles

 

Democracy is NOT the problem.

This word comes from the Greek root 'people power'. So our US Constitution has given the people that power. The trouble is, it is not working as it should.

 

Republic, comes from the Latin root 'WEALTH + public'.

So the republicans serve the wealthy to the demise of the public welfare.

Of course, the power of the Latin church has a lot to do with this.

 

Mike C

[eric l]

Charles

 

Democracy is NOT the problem.

This word comes from the Greek root 'people power'. So our US Constitution has given the people that power. The trouble is, it is not working as it should.

 

Republic, comes from the Latin root 'WEALTH + public'.

So the republicans serve the wealthy to the demise of the public welfare.

Of course, the power of the Latin church has a lot to do with this.

 

Mike C

 

I thought that "RES PUBLICA" just means "public affair", not necessarily "wealth". But "res" can also be translated as "business", and from there it's but a small step to "wealth".

 

I forget whom I'm quoting with "Power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely", but I can aggree wholeheartedly. And in a democracy, there is no room for absolute power.

[Qfwfq]

I thought that "RES PUBLICA" just means "public affair"

...and it does, with affair meant in the sense of administration, governance. :lightning

 

I don't get Mike's point about the power of the Latin church.

[charles brough]

Charles,Democracy is NOT the problem.

This word comes from the Greek root 'people power'. So our US Constitution has given the people that power. The trouble is, it is not working as it should.

 

Republic, comes from the Latin root 'WEALTH + public'.

So the republicans serve the wealthy to the demise of the public welfare.

Of course, the power of the Latin church has a lot to do with this.Mike C

I hope I was dealing with the words "democracy" and "republic" as what they really stand for now---not what they might mean from their ancient roots! You make it seem like the Democrats don't serve the wealthy because the word "democracy" means "people power"!

 

Our Constitution, by the way, gave the power to the landed rich. Wasn't it Jefferson who took it away and gave it to the commercial rich? You mention it is not working; I thought that was what I was writing about!

[charles brough]

I thought that "RES PUBLICA" just means "public affair", not necessarily "wealth". But "res" can also be translated as "business", and from there it's but a small step to "wealth".

 

I forget whom I'm quoting with "Power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely", but I can aggree wholeheartedly. And in a democracy, there is no room for absolute power.

 

"Power corrupts. . . ." Yes, and perhaps it corrupts the people as well after they have held power for a while. After all, what happened to the Greek democracy, so called (2/3 of the people were slaves and indentured)? It turned into a mobocracy and became corrupt. How can a democracy be maintained if the people themselves become apathetic, fearful, stressed out, violence and sex prone, divided, self-endulgent and unable to even elect competent people to represent them?

[Buffy]

So what political system is able to eliminate corruption?

 

I want one of those, :cheer:

Buffy

[Freddy]

"Power corrupts. . . ." Yes, and perhaps it corrupts the people as well after they have held power for a while. After all, what happened to the Greek democracy, so called (2/3 of the people were slaves and indentured)? It turned into a mobocracy and became corrupt. How can a democracy be maintained if the people themselves become apathetic, fearful, stressed out, violence and sex prone, divided, self-endulgent and unable to even elect competent people to represent them?

I think you hit the nail on the head! Could a truly uncorrupted individual gain public office in today's political reality? Getting elected and spending the most money in the campaign are highly correlated, especially in state and federal elections.

[eric l]

I think you hit the nail on the head! Could a truly uncorrupted individual gain public office in today's political reality? Getting elected and spending the most money in the campaign are highly correlated, especially in state and federal elections.

 

If this is true, the public is also to blame. I give you a quote from a wise old politician (a very rare species indeed) who prefers to remain anonymous. "In a democracy you have to keep a sane level of distrust for those that you put in power. And if you are put in power yourself, you should increase that level of distrust. There are so many temptations, and it is so easy to believe you are always right because power is knowledge rather than the other way around." (I'm affraid my translation does not do it justice).

 

Bob Dylan worded it otherwise : "Don't follow leaders, watch you parking meters".

 

Democracy is not to be left to the people you ellect, it's the bussiness of everyone who considers him/herself part of the People.

[Mike C]

I thought that "RES PUBLICA" just means "public affair", not necessarily "wealth". But "res" can also be translated as "business", and from there it's but a small step to "wealth".

 

I forget whom I'm quoting with "Power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely", but I can aggree wholeheartedly. And in a democracy, there is no room for absolute power.

 

I got my information from my latest Websters Desk dictionary (1998) that described the roots briefly and concisely.

My earlier Websters (1987) was kind of confusing but still described our government more accurately as a democracy although the republic version was also accurately portrayed.

My American College dictionary (1967) was confusing.

 

If we look at the way our governments function today here in the US. The representative parties are described accurately as I said.

The republican party supports corruption (McCain/Feingold Bill) that was a step in the right direction to ban 'soft money' that did not have to be accounted for.

 

Mike C

[Mike C]

I hope I was dealing with the words "democracy" and "republic" as what they really stand for now---not what they might mean from their ancient roots! You make it seem like the Democrats don't serve the wealthy because the word "democracy" means "people power"!

 

Our Constitution, by the way, gave the power to the landed rich. Wasn't it Jefferson who took it away and gave it to the commercial rich? You mention it is not working; I thought that was what I was writing about!

 

I'm talking about conditions today. Past history is eliminated such as the slavery issue and the gender issue and etc.

In other words, when I say a Constitutional government, I mean ALL the Amendments included.

 

Mike C.

[Freddy]

If this is true, the public is also to blame.

Bob Dylan worded it otherwise : "Don't follow leaders, watch you parking meters".

 

Democracy is not to be left to the people you ellect, it's the bussiness of everyone who considers him/herself part of the People.

Therein lies the rub as the public does not vote. A majority of Americans who are qualified to do so do not vote. I received several personal calls from candidates recently simply because they knew I vote in every election. I also receive many prerecorded calls from candidates. In this recent election the turnout was about 12% of registered voters. Freakin' sad and disgusting!

[HydrogenBond]

Maybe more interest in voting would occur if people could vote on issues instead of for polititians. I always thought a fourth branch of govenment could be added that is based on the will of the people. There are plenty of smart people and the internet would allow connectivity.

 

As a simple precursor, with no binding power, say the government gave each tax payer a mini-budget breakdown of the national budget at tax time. Next, to the current budget, there is a blank pie chart. Each tax payer fills in the blank chart using the tax money amont they are going to send to the IRS. The actual budget gives one an idea how to fill in one's own budget. So if you will pay $2000, in taxes, one may give the military $400, SS may get $1000, etc. Then the IRS tabulates all this data to see what all the tax payers of the country want. This data collection could use the internet to make it easier to tabulate. It is not binding but would be an interesting social experiment to see if people are reasonable.

[C1ay]

Charles

 

Democracy is NOT the problem.

This word comes from the Greek root 'people power'. So our US Constitution has given the people that power. The trouble is, it is not working as it should.

 

Republic, comes from the Latin root 'WEALTH + public'.

So the republicans serve the wealthy to the demise of the public welfare.

Of course, the power of the Latin church has a lot to do with this.

 

Mike C

 

Democracy is the problem. Our country was not founded with a democracy but a democratic republic. The problem is that it is becoming more of a true democracy.

 

A true democracy is defined as mob rule because the majority makes all of the rules. Eventually the public figures out that they can vote themselves whatever they want and they drain the public treasury. A true democracy has never survived.

 

Our republic is a representative form of democracy. It is supposed to represent the majority of the people while protecting minorities from the majority. It was originally founded with a representative branch, an executive branch and a judicial branch. The representative branch was divided into 2 houses, the House of Representatives to represent the people and the Senate to represent the states. People elected their representatives and the state legislatures appointed theirs, the Senators. Unfortunately the 17th amendment made the Senators elected people with effectively made them representatives of the people as well bringing us a step closer to true democracy.

 

Now we also have government testing every little aspect of governing through polls which is further putting public opinion in charge of government. This is a bad thing. Imagine what will happen when the people decide that the government should just send everyone in the country a million dollars. Our country would be broke. Imagine if the majority decided to reinstate slavery. We would destroy ourselves from within.

 

True democracy is a bad thing. You should look more into it's history.

[eric l]

...

A true democracy is defined as mob rule because the majority makes all of the rules. Eventually the public figures out that they can vote themselves whatever they want and they drain the public treasury. A true democracy has never survived.

...

True democracy is a bad thing. You should look more into it's history.

 

I don't share your pessimism on this. I know that no modern state functions along the lines of what you call "a true democracy", by which you mean (if I understand you rightly) that everyone can vote on every issue. Decission making would be too slow, and decissions would be revoked too often. And voting might become even more of a spectacle than it already is.

 

But Switzerland comes close - and it is no accident that Switzerland has the kind of "well organized militia" mentioned in the 2nd Amendement to the US Constitution, without endangering the general public.

I remember how during a summer holiday in Switzerland, we were sitting on the terrace of a pub in a minor Swiss tow, and saw groups of armed men passing by. Some had modern rifles, obviously army issue, but there were also sabres and halberds and similar pieces of antique. The waitresses explained that it was voting day, and that the men were assembling in the market square to vote on some 25 different issues, and that they had to show their personal weapon to make clear that they were able to defend their country in the militia.

I don't suppose that all Swiss towns make such a show of this voting day; neither will every issue be left to direct vote by the public, most things are left to elected representatives. And that only men could vote can hardly be seen as "truely democratic".

 

The fact remains that in most nations there will be more people who complain constantly over their government that there are people who try to influence that government by casting their vote. But for those Swiss, going to vote was at least as much part of their national identity as their right to bear a weapon.

[Mike C]

So what political system is able to eliminate corruption?

 

I want one of those, :)

Buffy

 

I wrote an article entitled 'My Brand of Socialism' that is fully compatible with the US Constitution.

If I did not post it here previously, then I will tomorrow.

 

It will outlaw corruption by having the government finance the electoral process while 'banning' all private expenditures of advertising and such.

This payed advertising is NOT free speech. So I think it can be banned legally.

 

Mike C

[Mike C]

Democracy is the problem. Our country was not founded with a democracy but a democratic republic. The problem is that it is becoming more of a true democracy.

 

A true democracy is defined as mob rule because the majority makes all of the rules. Eventually the public figures out that they can vote themselves whatever they want and they drain the public treasury. A true democracy has never survived.

 

Our republic is a representative form of democracy. It is supposed to represent the majority of the people while protecting minorities from the majority. It was originally founded with a representative branch, an executive branch and a judicial branch. The representative branch was divided into 2 houses, the House of Representatives to represent the people and the Senate to represent the states. People elected their representatives and the

 

state legislatures appointed theirs, the Senators. Unfortunately the 17th amendment made the Senators elected people with effectively made them representatives of the people as well bringing us a step closer to true democracy.

 

Now we also have government testing every little aspect of governing through polls which is further putting public opinion in charge of government. This is a bad thing. Imagine what will happen when the people decide that the government should just send everyone in the country a million dollars. Our country would be broke. Imagine if the majority decided to reinstate slavery. We would destroy ourselves from within.

 

True democracy is a bad thing. You should look more into it's history.

 

I had to laugh at your interpretation of a democracy. Especially ours.

 

Our Democracy is created to eliminate any kings, dictators or other power mad rulers.

It guarantees individual rights with the 'Bill of Rights' and 'trial by juries'

The old days of 'mob rule' in the early west are gone for good, I hope. That applies to the southern Ku Klux Klan as well.

 

The main problem in our country today is 'dollar power'.

We all need dollars to survive in this modern society. So we all need 'jobs' to sustain ourselves.

But the 'self serving' McDollar Stuffers want it all for themselves.

Their dollars can even influence the religious institutions besides the politicians and even the people with their advertsing blitzes.

 

That is why I advocate the Public Financing Of Our Elections to even the playing field for the more honest politicians.

These advertising 'blitzes' can be banned too because the people cannot advertise to counter their ads. These ads could be allowed though if they also pay for a rebuttal. Otherrwise, they have an 'advantage' that the people do not have.

 

Mike C