Democracy and Majority Rule

[beretta304]

Bareass still bellyaching about the fact that the majority of Americans don't see things the way that he does.

Did you read the article? That's not what this is about. The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

Today's Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a measure is a good idea or a bad idea should determine its passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt.

Small Stones has a matching small mind and even a smaller capacity to grasp the message.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What's so good about democracy and majority rule?

The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. The word democracy appears in neither of our founding documents: our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."


John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Edmund Randolph said, "... that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III. Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where political decision-making is kept to the minimum.

Democracy and Majority Rule by Walter E. Williams

Yup.

Surprise surprise! the richest men in the revolutionary colonies weren't entirely on board with the idea that the common people could manage their own affairs.

Who'da thunk?

No.....not "manage their own affairs", as-much-as "common"-people deciding what's "best" for everyone-else!!!

See: Abortion​

 

[Sallow]

Basically this is yet another whine about losing the election.

It would be a shame if that's all it were. The role of democracy, and the limitations place on it by a properly enforced constitution, are critical components of our form of government.

Sadly, there's a lot of confusion about the way our government works and there are those who want to see relatively unlimited majority rule, which is very dangerous.

Since the inception of the country it seems the confusion is on the part of conservatives, since A. They feel that they should have a lock on the reigns of power and when not given that B. They feel that the "States" should have more power.

Neither concept is supported by the constitution.

 

[Sallow]

What's so good about democracy and majority rule?

The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. The word democracy appears in neither of our founding documents: our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."


John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Edmund Randolph said, "... that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III. Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where political decision-making is kept to the minimum.

Democracy and Majority Rule by Walter E. Williams

Yup.

Surprise surprise! the richest men in the revolutionary colonies weren't entirely on board with the idea that the common people could manage their own affairs.

Who'da thunk?

No.....not "manage their own affairs", as-much-as "common"-people deciding what's "best" for everyone-else!!!

See: Abortion​

Exactly.

 

[Freewill]

To the op, then stop claiming on other posts we are a democracy. Also if you don't like it, leave.

Never did asshole. I know what we are and it's not a democracy. Care to link to where I said what you claimed? I didn't think so. Get back to the bus stop before you miss the short bus.

If you admit you knew that the USA is not a democracy but a republic then what in the hell was the point of the OP? We have a representative government where majority of the representatives rule through majority rule. Not sure what is so hard to understand. When in the history of America did we have a vote in Congress where the bill was passed because a miniority voted for it?

 

[Sallow]

Bareass still bellyaching about the fact that the majority of Americans don't see things the way that he does.

Did you read the article? That's not what this is about. The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

Today's Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a measure is a good idea or a bad idea should determine its passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt.

Yep.

The article hits all the conservative talking points, nicely, and leaves out the real problems.

Mainly corporate influence.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Basically this is yet another whine about losing the election.

It would be a shame if that's all it were. The role of democracy, and the limitations place on it by a properly enforced constitution, are critical components of our form of government.

Sadly, there's a lot of confusion about the way our government works and there are those who want to see relatively unlimited majority rule, which is very dangerous.

The Ox-Bow Incident​

An American classic!!

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIDfzCzdjcs]The Ox-Bow Incident (trailer) - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Wry Catcher]

We have a hybrid, a democratic republic.

We directly elect our representatives in the HoR every two years.

We directly elect one-third of our Senators, every two years.

We directly elect the electoral college every four years.

All of which clearly leave the power to change our government directly in the hands of The People.

The Supreme Court is composed of persons nominated and confirmed by those The People elected to do their bidding.

Many states provide direct democracy in terms of changing their Constitution: The Initiative. This process is direct democracy and does alloy for the tyranny of the majority. The manner in which this has been abused demonstrates the genius of the authors/signers of the Federal Constitution (that an their ability to reach compromise) by not allowing The People the power on the Federal level to deny the rights of a class of citizens as did California in Prop. 8.

Our Federal Gov't does not allow for the referendum, the ability of the people to express their opinion on matters of concern. Imagine the chaos if we had had a referendum on the invasion of Iraq, and then one on the occupation of Iraq.

Finally, the recall, again an example of direct democracy. This too has been used and is also a from of direct democracy. One which has been used rarely but one where the power of the people to hold elected officials accountable for behaviors not amounting to a high crime or misdemeanor can be effectively implemented.

Of course even our representatives can abuse such a power - therein called impeachment - solely for political purposes. Showing that mobs can be great in size or as small as 50% plus one in the HoR; again the genius of the authors/signers in making impeachment only an allegation and leaving the trier of fact to the Senate.

In the final analysis we are a democracy, for every action taken by our representatives is judged in the voting booth at least once every two years. Which is why our form of democracy is unique to history. Yes it is cumbersome but until something better comes along it is the best form of government, one "conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal".

It seems those who want to change our form of democracy - in words and function - have an agenda fostered in their belief that the essence of America is something different than that proposition expressed by President Lincoln at Gettysburg a century and a half ago.

 

[beretta304]

To the op, then stop claiming on other posts we are a democracy. Also if you don't like it, leave.

Never did asshole. I know what we are and it's not a democracy. Care to link to where I said what you claimed? I didn't think so. Get back to the bus stop before you miss the short bus.

If you admit you knew that the USA is not a democracy but a republic then what in the hell was the point of the OP? We have a representative government where majority of the representatives rule through majority rule. Not sure what is so hard to understand. When in the history of America did we have a vote in Congress where the bill was passed because a miniority voted for it?

You have heard the term conversational purposes? You do realize that's what is supposed to take place here? But I digress...

 

[dblack]

Bareass still bellyaching about the fact that the majority of Americans don't see things the way that he does.

Did you read the article? That's not what this is about. The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

Today's Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a measure is a good idea or a bad idea should determine its passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt.

Yep.

The article hits all the conservative talking points, nicely, and leaves out the real problems.

Mainly corporate influence.

LOL. You're accusing me of parroting talking points? That's rich. Really.

Anyway, maybe someday you'll come to realize that the principle of limited government protects us from abusive government regardless of who is pulling the strings - corporations or the 'unwashed masses'. Most of the policies that give unfair advantage to corporate interests violate constitutional limitations on government and would be reversed by a prudent court.

Unfortunately, with 'friends' like Roberts on the bench, that's not going to happen. It's up to us to demand it - rather ironically - via democratic action.

 

[Katzndogz]

Our form of government is a representative republic. Not a democracy, although because we do have a democratic method of selecting representatives, our founders knew that there would come a day when the people would reject the republic and choose a dictator instead. When arguing for the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin said that the Constitution would not last forever. That day is now.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's so good about democracy and majority rule?

The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. The word democracy appears in neither of our founding documents: our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."


John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Edmund Randolph said, "... that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III. Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where political decision-making is kept to the minimum.

Democracy and Majority Rule by Walter E. Williams

I'm curious as to what suddenly prompted this topic?

Did your side lose an election recently, by any chance?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Our form of government is a representative republic. Not a democracy, although because we do have a democratic method of selecting representatives, our founders knew that there would come a day when the people would reject the republic and choose a dictator instead. When arguing for the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin said that the Constitution would not last forever. That day is now.

You're an idiot. I know, that's an ad hominem attack, but your posting is so ridiculous as to warrant no other response.

 

[beretta304]

What's so good about democracy and majority rule?

The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. The word democracy appears in neither of our founding documents: our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."


John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Edmund Randolph said, "... that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III. Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where political decision-making is kept to the minimum.

Democracy and Majority Rule by Walter E. Williams

I'm curious as to what suddenly prompted this topic?

Did your side lose an election recently, by any chance?

Do you repeat yourself willfully or is it dementia?

 

[dblack]

Our form of government is a representative republic. Not a democracy, although because we do have a democratic method of selecting representatives, our founders knew that there would come a day when the people would reject the republic and choose a dictator instead. When arguing for the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin said that the Constitution would not last forever. That day is now.

The question of majority rule is broader than the direct role of voters. We use principles of democracy at all levels of government, via our representatives, and the question is still relevant. Regardless of whether the majority will pursued via elected representatives or direct vote, how much power should the majority have? Which is another way of asking "How much power should government have?"

The core issue is that many people don't see any reason to limit majority rule. We see this view around here all the time, with people crowing that policy "X" is a good and should be adopted (or continued) because it is supported by the majority - even when it violates Constitutional limits on government power. That kind of unlimited majority rule can't last.

 

[editec]

The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

The people understand that just as well today as they ever did.

In other words many understand it, many are confused about it and the rest of them don't know/care about the issue one way or the other.


But I'm pretty damned sure I know what prompted this antidemocracy post.


If there's one thing that scares the hell out of the masters and their tools, its the thought that a real democracy might replace the elitist form of government that exists in the USA.

I can actually sort of understand and sympathize with that fear, too.


There is no more perfectly formed democractic institution than an ad hoc lynch mob.

 

[beretta304]

The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

The people understand that just as well today as they ever did.

In other words many understand it, many are confused about it and the rest of them don't know/care about the issue one way or the other.


But I'm pretty damned sure I know what prompted this antidemocracy post.


If there's one thing that scares the hell out of the masters and their tools, its the thought that a real democracy might replace the elitist form of government that exists in the USA.

I can actually sort of understand and sympathize with that fear, too.


There is no more perfectly formed democractic institution than an ad hoc lynch mob.

Is it ignorance, blindness or both? Since you need to have a motivatiing, unlterior motive check out reply # 29.

th

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's so good about democracy and majority rule?

The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. The word democracy appears in neither of our founding documents: our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."


John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Edmund Randolph said, "... that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III. Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where political decision-making is kept to the minimum.

Democracy and Majority Rule by Walter E. Williams

I'm curious as to what suddenly prompted this topic?

Did your side lose an election recently, by any chance?

Do you repeat yourself willfully or is it dementia?

If a majority of Americans support having a 2nd Amendment, and a minority of Americans want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment,

whose voice is more important? The majority or the minority? Should we get rid of the 2nd amendment because by keeping it,

we're allowing the majority to tyrannize the minority?

 

[beretta304]

I'm curious as to what suddenly prompted this topic?

Did your side lose an election recently, by any chance?

Do you repeat yourself willfully or is it dementia?

If a majority of Americans support having a 2nd Amendment, and a minority of Americans want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment,

whose voice is more important? The majority or the minority? Should we get rid of the 2nd amendment because by keeping it,

we're allowing the majority to tyrannize the minority?

Exactly why the article was posted...to generate debate and discusssion. You can be trained afterall.

 

[dblack]

The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

The people understand that just as well today as they ever did.

In other words many understand it, many are confused about it and the rest of them don't know/care about the issue one way or the other.


But I'm pretty damned sure I know what prompted this antidemocracy post.


If there's one thing that scares the hell out of the masters and their tools, its the thought that a real democracy might replace the elitist form of government that exists in the USA.

I can actually sort of understand and sympathize with that fear, too.

Can you?

I'm not that interested in what prompted the OP. But I do think the topic of the thread is crucial to the future of our democracy. Constitutional limitations are the glue, the stable foundation, that makes democracy sustainable.

There is no more perfectly formed democractic institution than an ad hoc lynch mob.

Really? What do you mean?