Democracy is nothing more than a gang of bullies

Democracy, more correcly stated DeMOBcracy is one gang versus another gang.

Either gang is more than happy to violate your rights presumably protected by the constitution to get more for them and less for you.

Does it matter which side you are on?

If you are democrat or republican or with any other gang I am suggesting that you you have joined a gang and are using the force of the ballot box and guns behind it to violate the other gangs rights to get more for yourselves.

Where does that leave those of us who want nothing to do with your gang warfare?

This is not government by consent, its government by force of gang versus gang.

DeMOBcracy

 

Democracy is majority rule. In it's pure form (unlimited) it serves to justify any evil a majority happens to support. When limited to the selection of public officials who are bound by a constitution in a republic, it's the tool of expressing consent (.. Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..) for the power the official will exercise. People should qualify their objections carefully in these forums. You will be accused of denying people their right to vote if you are not.

 

The USA is a democracy. Our founding fathers created a constitutional republic but the politically correct and big govt crowd pissed on it. The 10th amendment is very specific and are the others. We do not currently have a constitutional govt. We have a govt that is slave to the parasites of this nation and until we the people take it back then we are doomed to fail.

 

You need a democracy with limits and checks and balances in order to be effective. That is why the USA has a republican form of democracy (hence the names of the two political parties). If you veer too far away from, or too close to, pure democracy you lose functionality and fairness.

 

You need to learn how to spell properly. It's D e m o c r a c y.

 

Your comment shows that you don't know anything about democracy.

 

how is consent expressed?

Not one amendment ever went to the states for referendum and vote by the "people".

representing us in one thing however they construed representing as "deciding" for us as rulers NOT administrators of OUR will.


Hell most constitutions null and void since none of the people ever voted on them.

They label the state as the all encompassing people and it is not.

 

Sure I do


Mob 1 votes against Mob 2.

Which ever mob has the most votes wins and the other mob has to OBEY regardless if it is a violation of their rights or not.

The most votes is the biggest gang, just like the mafia, and the biggest gang wins.

I guess the founders wanted us to have gang warfare as a government.

Pretty simple stuff really dont you think?

 

Its deMOBcracy arguments to the contrary welcome

 

Ah finally a voice of reason.

But yet it runs deeper than that.

You do not choose the high judges of the supreme court, the jurys do not act in the capacity of a court judging both facts as law as intended in number 7 and you never got to vote on one amendment.

In theory that is the way it is supposed to work but how do you explain forced health care?

YOur rights being converted in to priviliges? YOu do know you are not a party to the first 10 amendments dont you?

 

What do you prefer?

 

Who actually means that democracy means freedom? That never was the case before.

 

You are characterizing how you think the institution of democracy is abused, not whether the institution properly limited is justified.

 

You can't lay claim to very much property without resorting to gang warfare. Democracy is the least offensive form of gang warfare I've ever heard of.

Is there a better alternative?

 

As extreme as your view is, there is some substance to it. But, I would suggest you review the historical cornerstones of Democracy from early Greece to the Magna Carta and the drafting of the United States constitution.

I agree that the party system, as structured is a form of mild, civilized gang warfare, but the under current of your post is to throw it out because of imperfections. And in the vacuum will come what?

The problem is not the politicians but the sheep who baa baa behind them. Because this or that politician is saying the right things in an appealing way and has 'charisma', one sector lines up behind him based purely on his headlines, never bothering to check more deeply. "Hope and change?" Sure I'll buy that.

However, I suggest to you that if a majority of the populace was independent, aligned to no party and prepared to vote for what is best for the country, you will get independent politicians who are prepared to do what is right for the country.

I do not know the speaker, but there is a quote that goes "democracy is a slow, lumbering and thoughtless beast, often resulting in the lowest common denominator...but it is the best system we have."

 

Anything is better than a Democracy. As Democracy is determined by what is popular, not by what is right.

 

LOL. Really I am enjoying this comments

 

Anything? So, can I be dictator? I will be kind and benevolent...I promise.

Oh, wait, make me king....

 

What if you got your "democracy" and everyone decided that all the wealthy had to work at the expense of all the non wealthy. Would that be right?

 

Good post, for the most part....Democracy is the Tyranny of the 51% over the 49%.....and not the fairytale so many statists like to believe.

....but my gang is trying to save the Republic.....not bring about Mobacracy. If you hold any belief in the Constituion and a Limited Government....you definintely want to join my gang.
.
.
.

 

A good portion of dictatorships were formed under democracies. Adolf Hitler, Napoleon, Julius Caesar, and so on.

 

That would be A-ok to most Democrats......

After all, Democracy isnt about right or wrong.....its who gets to decide whats right or wrong.
.
.
.

 

she is right.

if those jokers people like to call leaders convince everyone that there are wmds and people are dumb enough to go along with it, then after they are in there and people want them out once again they convince the people they have to "stay the course" and come up with all sorts of bs reasons to stay and create an imperial state, by most reasonable peoples standards that would not be considered right or correct policy

 

And what do you prefer?

 

look at the statutes from your state and tell us how many of them YOU got to vote on?