US no longer a democracy study finds

Just a normal fake democracy as other democratic countries. If you think you have the real power to decide things then you are quite dumb, in fact people are only directed toward their decisions through propaganda. It's almost impossible to find neutral info, not even necessarily politically-bound ideas, some people are just dogmatic. And since nobody is born with any knowledge, all your ideas are basically that of other people, ever thought about that? Anyway not everything is for the worst, sometimes there are just necessities.

 

and the Supreme Court is working overtime to make sure it stays that way.

 

You could mention a lot of things and that's called deflection. This is the most corrupt and Leftist (Marxist) admin ever. And you support them. Oh the taint.

 

It's not deflection love, but a reflection of reality and American political history. Oh, and by the way, I don't support any US administration; why would anyone, frankly?

 

The US has the best democracy that money can buy!

 

Yes, greed rules in USA. We need a progressive democratic party. Now we have only two: right and center-right. Both serve corporations.

 

In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy." I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.

A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.

 

Maybe we are closer to a democratic oligarchy?

 

I usually just read past these silly partisan scapegoat posts, but this one kind of jumped out of me as a bit silly.

Can you explain to me how welfare recipients have impacted democracy?

 

So in your definition this republic is even more democratic than your definition of a democracy, since every single person has a vote. Now that would make it a democratic republic in my mind. I think you have pointed out a very subtle difference. Trouble is having lived and voted in UK I find US's democratic republic excessively democratic, sometimes very bureaucratic and slow to adopt political change, when that change would be very sensible for the good of the people. Minorities seem to have more power than is their due. It's amazing that the business culture still manages considerable freedom and dynamism. I also find it quite amazing that the right seems to be so opposed to a decent healthcare system for all and quite happily looks the other way when people go bankrupt because they are sick.

But USA is going the way of all great Empires. It may take a while to fail completely, but it will happen faster than previous declines, because modern technology and communication makes it possible.

 

This is so true. I have never thought about it that way. So the extension of this would be that all children are first trained by their parents then by the indoctrination of the school system and whatever other organisations they come in contact with.

So as the single Mom society expands and the errant father continues to be prevalent then why are we not surprised that each generation of society becomes more female oriented, because the influence of the father becomes less and less in the future generations of children.

 

Though Watergate may have given its namesake to scandals, it doesn't make it a particularly egregious scandal. But that's my opinion, because I rate crimes against human rights as much worse than crimes against politicians.

It's all subjective.. Truman wanted to try out his new nukes so he made a false dichotomy and tricked the history books into thinking it was that or millions of lives lost in a full fledged invasion, even though they could have defeated Japan easily via siege warfare. I think those two greatest terrorist attacks in the history of mankind are worse than Watergate... But that's just me... What about carpeting millions of people with toxic rainbow chemicals from Monsanto, under the guise of "defoliating" Vietnam? The worst, most prolonged and deadly chemical weapons attack in the history of mankind. Then who could forget about the Iraq invasion of 2003? A million dead, destroyed country and looted Babylonian artefacts, just for corporate profiteering. What about Pinochet? Probably a bit worse than the tyrant in Egypt the USA currently support, even though the tyrants in Egypt massacre their protestors and are pretty much throwing anyone they don't like in jail.Atrocities will never stop, and it's just your choice about what you feel are more evil than others.

Watergate ain't (*)(*)(*)(*)! Not much of a scandal by comparison Look what the NSA do. They bug a few hotel rooms too.. And with the CIA, weapons and cash are being handed free to AQ while they try to carry out genocide and install a sharia caliphate state. Between this, and the LIBOR scandal, which appears to be part of an even bigger criminal conspiracy, the biggest white collar crime ever, among many others, robbing the whole world.

 

You people are the ones who are confused believing that a Republic cant be a democracy.

 

Explain to me how Nancy Pelosi and Harry reid were elected to represent that entire country again....or exercise power over them?

 

Please read Flyboy56 a few posts before. I think that clearly shows that the US, whilst a republic, is supposed to be even more democratic than a more conventional understanding of a political democracy, because by constitutional edict every eligible person has a vote. I am not sure that is true in many Republics. I certainly don't perceive it was true in USSR, which also called itself a republic. Just because a nation claims to be a Republic it doesn't mean the people are free to vote democratically, as in USA.

 

There is a massive difference between being ' free to vote ' and having a reasonable choice of candidates. What passes for democracy in the West is entirely dependent upon the buying power of the few.

 

No one claimed it was. I was disputing the assertion that a Republic, by definition is not a democracy.

 

Politicians are forced to kow tow to various people and groups in order to be elected, which makes me wonder if democracy is the best form of government? Does our government really serve the people, or is it serving the most driven and powerful interest groups? Also are ambitious people who strive with whatever means possible to reach the top , more qualified in their basic morals and values then those who were raised and bred to serve the people?

The U.S. was created with an ideal that the ruler should have a nobility of character rather than one of heredity, yet we see that it has failed miserably in recent years. Maybe these modernist ideas should be given up, and monarchies should be restored?

 

With an efficient eDemocracy we won't need representatives or rulers at all. When the will of the people becomes paramount there won't be any profit in politics for the creeps in control today.

 

You really are such a dreamer moon beam.

 

My dreams appear to be your nightmares, flybot.

 

According to the study, we're essentially a plutocratic republic.

The Constitution is intended for a democratic republic.

 

Direct democracy is limited in its appeal.

We definitely need to improve how our campaign financing works, but I wouldn't want to live in a society where everything was up for a referendum.

California has a referendum-heavy system, and they are further in debt than any other state.

The general public can't be trusted with budgeting, but they should have a greater voice in who is elected.

 

California should let its public do the math.

 

"According to their data, when the rich support a policy, it has a 45% chance of becoming law."

Coin flip would be more dominating than this.