Occupy Wall Street

[pseudobio]

I think most of us can agree our political leaders need to be listening to "We the People" far more than they presently are, and that the general points and objectives of OWS, the removal of corruption and the removal of the ability to purchase political influence, are valid. I've been reading one of the unofficial blogs of OWS, however, and what I have noticed specifically on this particular blog, is that they don't just want the representative democracy reformed, but they want it scrapped and replaced with a direct democracy that they think will be fair to all. However, history has shown that direct democracies are bad for minority groups. It is very easy for just 51% of the voting population to take away the civil liberties of one or more of the minority groups, and when I mentioned this in the blog forum, it didn't seem to be of any concern to any of them at all. All they saw was that today's high tech would make it possible to do, which is certainly correct, but they seemed to be oblivious to the personal logistics of how much of a person's day would be consumed in voting on every little proposal someone could conjure up, or how it could potentially hurt minorities. We elect representatives who share our communities common interests, so that we can be free to conduct our lives as freely and civilly as possible. The fact that those representatives are ignoring the voters in their districts, and following the money like lemmings to a cliff, gives validation to the idea of more narrowly defining the representatives obligation to the voters, but it does not necessarily indicate a need to scrap the entire system, which I do not think is the objective of the broader focus of the overall OWS movement. Most OWS protesters, as do most voters, most likely want to still have the present system intact, but that they want it to work as it was intended to work.......for "We the People", and not for he who has the most gold. Perhaps term limits and voter involvement in congressional/Parlimentary pay raises might restore a representative's obligation to the people?

[Marxist ßastard]

However, history has shown that direct democracies are bad for minority groups. It is very easy for just 51% of the voting population to take away the civil liberties of one or more of the minority groups

Yes, and the current system just treats them so well.

[pseudobio]

However, history has shown that direct democracies are bad for minority groups. It is very easy for just 51% of the voting population to take away the civil liberties of one or more of the minority groups

Yes, and the current system just treats them so well.

 

 

It isn't perfect, but at least with the base ten amendments to our representative democracy, it protects my rights as a minority member better than a direct democracy would. In a direct democracy, they could easily repeal those ten amendments, stripping minority members like me of those civil liberties.

[Aurielius]

However, history has shown that direct democracies are bad for minority groups. It is very easy for just 51% of the voting population to take away the civil liberties of one or more of the minority groups

Yes, and the current system just treats them so well.

 

 

It isn't perfect, but at least with the base ten amendments to our representative democracy, it protects my rights as a minority member better than a direct democracy would. In a direct democracy, they could easily repeal those ten amendments, stripping minority members like me of those civil liberties.

It isn't the best system but it's better than the other systems. Athens had direct democracy and it lead to tyranny and repression which is why our founders looked to Sparta for a stable sytem that protected the minority.

[Marxist ßastard]

our founders looked to Sparta for a stable sytem that protected the minority

It makes perfect sense that our government is modeled after a society where the upper-class killed slaves as a right of passage.

[Aurielius]

our founders looked to Sparta for a stable sytem that protected the minority

It makes perfect sense that our government is modeled after a society where the upper-class killed slaves as a right of passage.

Helots were serfs not slaves.....more Herodotus and less Marx would have taught you the difference.

[Marxist ßastard]

Um... Okay? Are you nitpicking me now because you still believe that I'm secretly Communist?

 

The Helots were the demographic majority in Sparta, but the elite few could randomly murder them with impunity. So yeah, I guess minorities were treated pretty well in Sparta, if you were in the right minority.

 

EDIT: Okay, let me be perfectly clear. You are defending the murder and brutalization of slaves out of some weird personal beef with me. And that's terrible.

Edited November 9, 2011 by Marxist ßastard

[marharth]

You're telling me your good with history and your saying helots were more serfs then slaves? Are you also seriously suggesting that Herodotus is the most credible source for this information? Without question helots were constantly mistreated and not considered free people. Herodotus is one of the first historians and he had constantly over exaggerated history as well as mixing it with his own opinions.

 

Regardless of that, its still not a good idea to base your government off of a society that sacrifices parts of their lower class illogically. That is not a valid system to look to for protecting the minority. I am also not even sure why you think Sparta was a big thing we based our government off because it was not. The Magna Carta and other European influences is what we based the government off. The big thing was the enlightenment age and the more specifically the enlightenment age in France that supported the lower and middle class instead of the upper class that ruled the french at the time. This eventually led to the ideas that formed the USA and what caused the french revolution.

 

The protests are essentially the same thing. The lower and middle class wanting equality and wanting the upper class to have less power.

 

EDIT: In case it wasn't obvious I was replying to A. Pretty sure he is ignoring me however so I don't think it will make a difference.

Edited November 9, 2011 by marharth

[Aurielius]

Um... Okay? Are you nitpicking me now because you still believe that I'm secretly Communist?

 

The Helots were the demographic majority in Sparta, but the elite few could randomly murder them with impunity. So yeah, I guess minorities were treated pretty well in Sparta, if you were in the right minority.

 

EDIT: Okay, let me be perfectly clear. You are defending the murder and brutalization of slaves out of some weird personal beef with me. And that's terrible.

Actually if caught there were severe punishments....again..your classical history knowledge is somewhat sporadic.

[Thor.]

Ok, so, let's look at this a bit, California voters get to vote on darn near everything, and their budget is trashed. US Citizens don't get a say on federal budget matters (directly), and the federal budget is trashed. I don't see much of a difference there..... just who is at fault for our crappy financial position.

 

I agree on the judges thing though.....

 

Who is at fault for the Federal budget's crappiness? Umm...like, Bears Stearns, AIG, General Motors, Fannie Mae, etc.

 

 

Its more like Occupy street, then the wall part :whistling: bad pun.

Edited November 9, 2011 by Thor.