Has America arrived at the need for dictatorship?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by night_son, Jun 25, 2018.

  1. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,777
    Thanks Received:
    762
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Full Moon
    Ratings:
    +3,234
    ** Disclaimer: I am neither personally advocating for a dictator/monarch nor do I in any way support the implementation of such in our great nation. This is purely an Intellectual exercise suggested in the face of current issues.


    Wise men have interpreted dreams
    And the Gods have laughed . . .

    ~Howard Phillips Lovecraft


    Can the radical ideological division between political parties and thus the American people be traced to the root of our two party system? Would the elimination of the bi-partisan Congress alleviate the inability of our government to swiftly legislate the most important issues of our time?

    Immigration. Healthcare. Trade. Corruption. Lobbying. Campaign donations. Foreign Policy. Taxes.

    The above issues along with many others have stalled in Congress for ages over the steep ideological and even personal differences between sides within the House and Senate. We watch daily as individual US Representatives obstruct the progress of important bills for a plethora of reasons, many of which are never made transparent to the people. Congressmen and Senators submit their voting behaviors to party peer pressure, inclusion of perks for their own states and districts, lobbyist money and scientific and law enforcement committee reports spun with political seasoning just to name a few.

    Wouldn't the whole process be easier and much faster if partisan politics played less of a role? What if there were only one party? Wouldn't it be incredible to watch the most important issues of our age solved in a span of time relevant to the pressing needs of the people?

    We see political games played out repeatedly both in the media and the Congress while tens of millions of Americans suffer. Our Representatives earn excellent salaries and some of the best perks and benefits our nation has to offer. How can they truly represent our needs when their honorable duty has been popularized, monetized, commercialized? Isn't it time to cut out the middle men and women?

    How would the people control such an individual--a dictator? An election every ten years? Presidents seem to be on the verge of great accomplishment only to have them cut short by pesky elections. Put the power of the active duty military in the hands of the people? Call him what? A Constitutional Monocrat? Emperor President? An oversight court?

    Please offer up your thoughts on the matter.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  2. HaShev
    Offline

    HaShev Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,245
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,177
    I had a solution for this in my book "Keepers of the Unpopular Truth"
    Where our technology is allowing us the capability for individual citizens to vote on each issue not as a party line, thus truly being by the people not thwarted by obstructionist acts and it's up to parties to convey their position well enough to get the majority votes of each individual issue. But this would require the FCC to strictly regulate news that violates their licensing by manipulating news through propaganda and and defamation which sways those votes through controling media thus narratives influencing voting on individual issues. Of course both partiless voting and regulated broadcasts would eliminate many of the media gimicks.
    The whole system has to be updated due to fillibusters destroying the ability for the people to get their needs andxwants met and done.
    Equal Access rights (like to debates) to more parties.
    Maybe enact Fillibuster rules, like since the minority party claims majority should be able to pass legistlation then that majority parties majority vote should count as passed legistlation, like when courts/ judges can be utilized to declare voting is being supressed by obstruction spiteful down the line voting it can enact that special rule.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,777
    Thanks Received:
    762
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Full Moon
    Ratings:
    +3,234
    Very well thought out. I had been thinking for some time about how technology could put more direct power in the hands of citizens. I especially like how your idea flips the responsibility for advancement of party ideologies and agendas into individual hands. They truly work for the people for a change. Talk about cutting out the middle man. Great ideas.
     
  4. HaShev
    Offline

    HaShev Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,245
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,177
    Thanks.
    And as A.I. advances, we might rely on that super computing to do the talking points, in educating us on the cause and effects of each decision in helping our choices & final decision in voting.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. zaangalewa
    Offline

    zaangalewa Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2015
    Messages:
    3,651
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +458
    I calculated 80% of all US-Americans did not vote for president Trump.

    I would suggest: "Every human being one vote". I would say: Parents should vote for their children and all children should get more and more possibilities to vote with their growing age on their own.

    And in other democracies in the world Trump had not won, because he had not more than 50% of the votes. He had to make a coalition first with one of the more little political parties. Mrs. Clinton had more votes and I guess she had also a better chance to make a coalition with one of the more little parties of the USA.

     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2018
  6. there4eyeM
    Offline

    there4eyeM unlicensed metaphysician

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    12,551
    Thanks Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +4,866
    How many political parties were there in the first Congress?
    Certainly, the present system is already a form of dictatorship by the duopoly Republican_Democratic clique. We could have one party, thirteen parties, whatever worked, but things as they are look to be at the point of disaster.
    As for a dictator, the only one I would trust would not accept the position.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,777
    Thanks Received:
    762
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Full Moon
    Ratings:
    +3,234
    Yeah, an A.I. that runs predictive models. Guess we'd have to keep an eye on the programmers. I do think technology will in the near future redefine at least our interaction with politics if not modes of governance. Of course in may ways it already has. I remember well the birth of 24/7 news. It was like a narcotic sucker punch.
     
  8. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,777
    Thanks Received:
    762
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Full Moon
    Ratings:
    +3,234
    Thought provoking for sure. But how do we account for manipulation at polling places and possible electronic warfare interference by foreign powers?
     
  9. night_son
    Offline

    night_son Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    2,777
    Thanks Received:
    762
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    The Full Moon
    Ratings:
    +3,234
    That's exactly an issue I was trying to coax out with the topic: nothing really cuts through the Left and Right political grinder magnified even more by 24/7 barrage of slanted one way or the other news coverage. I agree and definitely think its past time for a meaningful assessment of the whole system if for nothing else than to see where our voices are lost in the din and this steep a divide occurs.

    As for the dictator of choice there would have to be some kind of irrevocable, air tight checks and balances on his or her powers. Perhaps some time limit or condition on when "ultimate authority" could be used. But of course, then that person would not be a true dictator.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. S.J.
    Offline

    S.J. Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    34,343
    Thanks Received:
    6,799
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Ratings:
    +31,341
    Neither did Bill Clinton.
     

Share This Page