Things that are democracies

[Ifreann]

And things that aren't.

So as not to derail the thread about an anti-gay group doing stuff I'm posting this thread. The tangent so far...

The good thing is, this isn't a democracy.

The US is indeed a democracy.

The US is indeed a democracy.

No... it's a republic for the most part. Only one part of the process is democratic and even that has another official vote within government. Popular vote counts for shit.

No... it's a republic for the most part. Only one part of the process is democratic and even that has another official vote within government. Popular vote counts for shit.

A republic is a democratic form of government.

A republic is a democratic form of government.

Democratic. Not a 'democracy'.

Democratic. Not a 'democracy'.

Not in the technical sense but when you won't let someone call a democratic form of government a democracy in common english you're being pedantic.

No... it's a republic for the most part. Only one part of the process is democratic and even that has another official vote within government. Popular vote counts for shit.

Being a republic doesn't mean it's not a democracy. Being a republic basically means that the head of state isn't a king or queen.

---

Democratic. Not a 'democracy'.

A country under a democratic government is a democracy.

Not in the technical sense but when you won't let someone call a democratic form of government a democracy in common english you're being pedantic.

Perhaps, but defining terminology is important for communication's sake. So no, generally I have people specify what sort of government they mean because it helps figure out what the hell they are talking about. And while the United States can be called a "Democratic Republic", because there are such things as Non-Democratic Republics (which call also be called hereditary oligarchy, depending), but generally speaking in the context of government, you cannot just call any form of government in which the people can vote a "Democracy", because it essentially defeats and overly simplifies the reasons and methods on how the government operates the way it does.

We elect representatives. We do not directly decide every law. Therefore, it is a republic.

Perhaps, but defining terminology is important for communication's sake. So no, generally I have people specify what sort of government they mean because it helps figure out what the hell they are talking about. And while the United States can be called a "Democratic Republic", because there are such things as Non-Democratic Republics (which call also be called hereditary oligarchy, depending), but generally speaking in the context of government, you cannot just call any form of government in which the people can vote a "Democracy", because it essentially defeats and overly simplifies the reasons and methods on how the government operates the way it does.

You absolutely can call any government in which people can vote a democracy, because that's what the word means. That it does not fully describe the operation of the government does not mean it is wrong.

We elect representatives. We do not directly decide every law. Therefore, it is a republic.

Has there ever been a country in human history where every law was decided by referendum? I'm not aware of any. If we're going to make a point of differentiating between governments that pass every law by referendum and governments that don't, then should we also differentiate between governments that make use of the dread powers of black magic and those that don't?

You absolutely can call any government in which people can vote a democracy, because that's what the word means. That it does not fully describe the operation of the government does not mean it is wrong.


Has there ever been a country in human history where every law was decided by referendum? I'm not aware of any. If we're going to make a point of differentiating between governments that pass every law by referendum and governments that don't, then should we also differentiate between governments that make use of the dread powers of black magic and those that don't?

That's the point. There has not been such a thing as an actual democracy since Ancient Greece (and even that was limited to landed males). We have come as close as we can in our age of empires, but it is not democracy. And perhaps that's for the better. Lord knows the classical philosophers had issues with Athens. But again, off topic.

Congratulations, you are now caught up. We new thread now!

---

You absolutely can call any government in which people can vote a democracy, because that's what the word means. That it does not fully describe the operation of the government does not mean it is wrong.


Has there ever been a country in human history where every law was decided by referendum? I'm not aware of any. If we're going to make a point of differentiating between governments that pass every law by referendum and governments that don't, then should we also differentiate between governments that make use of the dread powers of black magic and those that don't?

That's the point. There has not been such a thing as an actual democracy since Ancient Greece (and even that was limited to landed males). We have come as close as we can in our age of empires, but it is not democracy. And perhaps that's for the better. Lord knows the classical philosophers had issues with Athens. But again, off topic.

The term "representative democracy" would like to speak with you.

[Siaos]

Some people don't seem to understand that democratic representative Republics exist, and are democracies. The only real requirement for a democracy is that a certain group of citizens vote on laws/representatives which vote on laws. This group can be as small as land-owning white males inside a small town in North Dakota or as large as everyone on Earth, but they are all democracies.

[Vitaphone Racing]

I'm eagerly anticipating the semantic arguments and no-true-Scotsman fallacies that will surely grace this thread.

[Condunum]

I'm eagerly anticipating the semantic arguments and no-true-Scotsman fallacies that will surely grace this thread.

Well, what more can you expect from a labeling debate?

[Vitaphone Racing]

I'm eagerly anticipating the semantic arguments and no-true-Scotsman fallacies that will surely grace this thread.

Well, what more can you expect from a labeling debate?

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

[Condunum]

Well, what more can you expect from a labeling debate?

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

Speaking of football, Sunday needs to come faster.

[Siaos]

Well, what more can you expect from a labeling debate?

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

Well, technically that can be statement can be applied to anything.

[The Serbian Empire]

Some people don't seem to understand that democratic representative Republics exist, and are democracies. The only real requirement for a democracy is that a certain group of citizens vote on laws/representatives which vote on laws. This group can be as small as land-owning white males inside a small town in North Dakota or as large as everyone on Earth, but they are all democracies.

I would consider a representative Democracy to have forbid gerrymandering and ideally having a representation by proportional voting. The likes of the US and Russia are republics at best.

[Condunum]

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

Well, technically that can be statement can be applied to anything.

No statement more true.

[Ifreann]

Well, what more can you expect from a labeling debate?

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

[Siaos]

Some people don't seem to understand that democratic representative Republics exist, and are democracies. The only real requirement for a democracy is that a certain group of citizens vote on laws/representatives which vote on laws. This group can be as small as land-owning white males inside a small town in North Dakota or as large as everyone on Earth, but they are all democracies.

I would consider a representative Democracy to have forbid gerrymandering and ideally having a representation by proportional voting. The likes of the US and Russia are republics at best.

Its a democratic Republic in every meaning of the word. Its a somewhat corrupt, dysfunctional democracy, yes, but its still a democracy. Just because the system of democracy is crappy, it doesn't exclude them from being a democracy.

[Forster Keys]

Just coz it's a democracy doesn't mean it's good.

[Condunum]

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

I would be angry at you, but wow, it's actually tits and football.

[The Serbian Empire]

I would consider a representative Democracy to have forbid gerrymandering and ideally having a representation by proportional voting. The likes of the US and Russia are republics at best.

Its a democratic Republic in almost every meaning of the word. Its a somewhat corrupt, dysfunctional democracy, yes, but its still a democracy. Just because the system of democracy is crappy, it doesn't exclude them from being a democracy.

Is a gerrymander created by politicians to create favorable conditions for their own party truly a democratic creature to you?

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I don't know, but tits and football would be a nice touch.

Who cares about the tits? Look at those wonderful muscular legs. No, I'm not being ironic.

[Siaos]

Its a democratic Republic in almost every meaning of the word. Its a somewhat corrupt, dysfunctional democracy, yes, but its still a democracy. Just because the system of democracy is crappy, it doesn't exclude them from being a democracy.

Is a gerrymander created by politicians to create favorable conditions for their own party truly a democratic creature to you?

We aren't a gerrymander creature. Gerrymandering creates ridiculous electoral consequences, but it can't do everything. If one party has a solid majority in a state (Which many states do have) they are probably going to win the majority, gerrymandering or not. Besides, we still vote, and our vote has power, so we are technically a democracy.

[The Truth and Light]

Just coz it's a democracy doesn't mean it's good.

Can you, like, extrapolate?

[Ifreann]

Its a democratic Republic in almost every meaning of the word. Its a somewhat corrupt, dysfunctional democracy, yes, but its still a democracy. Just because the system of democracy is crappy, it doesn't exclude them from being a democracy.

Is a gerrymander created by politicians to create favorable conditions for their own party truly a democratic creature to you?

How is it not? The people in power get there by winning an election. That the competition wasn't fair doesn't mean it wasn't democratic. Those words aren't synonyms.

[Beta Test]

The United States uses a democratic system but is not a true democracy.

[The Serbian Empire]

Is a gerrymander created by politicians to create favorable conditions for their own party truly a democratic creature to you?

We aren't a gerrymander creature. Gerrymandering creates ridiculous electoral consequences, but it can't do everything. If one party has a solid majority in a state (Which many states do have) they are probably going to win the majority, gerrymandering or not. Besides, we still vote, and our vote has power, so we are technically a democracy.

I consider the ability for politicians to alter the district map in a closed room as anti-democratic in nature. If it was a non-partisan committee I would have no qualms about it, but the gerrymandered district in the state level of 2000 alters the Congressional map for 2020 assuming the state has no term limits in the state house and senate.

[Geilinor]

Why are so many people calling direct democracy "real democracy"? Representative democracy is quite real.

[Seperates]

And things that aren't.

So as not to derail the thread about an anti-gay group doing stuff I'm posting this thread. The tangent so far...

The US is indeed a democracy.

No... it's a republic for the most part. Only one part of the process is democratic and even that has another official vote within government. Popular vote counts for shit.

A republic is a democratic form of government.

Democratic. Not a 'democracy'.

Not in the technical sense but when you won't let someone call a democratic form of government a democracy in common english you're being pedantic.

Being a republic doesn't mean it's not a democracy. Being a republic basically means that the head of state isn't a king or queen.

---

A country under a democratic government is a democracy.

Perhaps, but defining terminology is important for communication's sake. So no, generally I have people specify what sort of government they mean because it helps figure out what the hell they are talking about. And while the United States can be called a "Democratic Republic", because there are such things as Non-Democratic Republics (which call also be called hereditary oligarchy, depending), but generally speaking in the context of government, you cannot just call any form of government in which the people can vote a "Democracy", because it essentially defeats and overly simplifies the reasons and methods on how the government operates the way it does.

We elect representatives. We do not directly decide every law. Therefore, it is a republic.

You absolutely can call any government in which people can vote a democracy, because that's what the word means. That it does not fully describe the operation of the government does not mean it is wrong.


Has there ever been a country in human history where every law was decided by referendum? I'm not aware of any. If we're going to make a point of differentiating between governments that pass every law by referendum and governments that don't, then should we also differentiate between governments that make use of the dread powers of black magic and those that don't?

That's the point. There has not been such a thing as an actual democracy since Ancient Greece (and even that was limited to landed males). We have come as close as we can in our age of empires, but it is not democracy. And perhaps that's for the better. Lord knows the classical philosophers had issues with Athens. But again, off topic.

Congratulations, you are now caught up. We new thread now!

---

That's the point. There has not been such a thing as an actual democracy since Ancient Greece (and even that was limited to landed males). We have come as close as we can in our age of empires, but it is not democracy. And perhaps that's for the better. Lord knows the classical philosophers had issues with Athens. But again, off topic.

The term "representative democracy" would like to speak with you.

Oh goody. And here I was trying to drop it.

"Representative democracy" is an attempt for the Western world to connect itself to a principle of Grecian democracy that has not, nor likely ever will exist within it. Because, here's the thing. In an actual 'representative democracy', as the order of English implies it, there is someone going to the democratic meeting, who represents the opinions of the people. He or she brings to votes of the people to the government and then votes for them, making it into a democracy. Now, for this to be actually democratic, in my opinion, all voices would be heard within that district, the representative would just be in charge of actually presenting the results to the government.

In a "Democratic Republic", officials are elected for their office in a democratic manner, hearing all voting voices. However, that official then essentially becomes a delegate, not actually bringing the views of all the people, simply the ones whom are his/her constituents to the government. They represent SOME people (republic), but they do not represent ALL the people (democracy). The U.S has always been a Democratic Republic, never a "representative democracy".

Keep in mind, this terminology was created in an age before telephones. You literally needed someone to go to the government building for you, because communication was slow and travel slower. So, yes, the terminology does matter historically, and the attempts to change it are signs of modernity attempting to change our connection to the past. Which is unfortunate... but unsurprising.

[Siaos]

We aren't a gerrymander creature. Gerrymandering creates ridiculous electoral consequences, but it can't do everything. If one party has a solid majority in a state (Which many states do have) they are probably going to win the majority, gerrymandering or not. Besides, we still vote, and our vote has power, so we are technically a democracy.

I consider the ability for politicians to alter the district map in a closed room as anti-democratic in nature. If it was a non-partisan committee I would have no qualms about it, but the gerrymandered district in the state level of 2000 alters the Congressional map for 2020 assuming the state has no term limits in the state house and senate.

But it doesn't matter, no matter how corrupt it is, you have the power the help put a person in power, so it is a democracy. A badly done democracy, but a democracy none the less.

[Geilinor]

We aren't a gerrymander creature. Gerrymandering creates ridiculous electoral consequences, but it can't do everything. If one party has a solid majority in a state (Which many states do have) they are probably going to win the majority, gerrymandering or not. Besides, we still vote, and our vote has power, so we are technically a democracy.

I consider the ability for politicians to alter the district map in a closed room as anti-democratic in nature. If it was a non-partisan committee I would have no qualms about it, but the gerrymandered district in the state level of 2000 alters the Congressional map for 2020 assuming the state has no term limits in the state house and senate.

We do need to control gerrymandering and adopt a more representative system.

[Avenio]

Just coz it's a democracy doesn't mean it's good.

Can you, like, extrapolate?

The Athenians, for instance, believed that women were pretty much subhuman, that slavery was perfectly alright and that poor people shouldn't have the right to vote.

And yet they were, by most estimates, a democratic society, and one that intensely valued that trait.