Krieger

First of all, how are we defining "dictatorship" and "democracy"? What are the most important characteristics of each? At first, the answer might seem so obvious, but once we look a little bit closer it is clearly not.

Is democracy merely any country that has "elections"? If that is the case, then basically every country on the planet is a democracy.

Is a democracy a system where a wealthy elite controls the economic and political system (i.e. capitalism)? This is what the American government would have us believe.

Does a dictatorship mean that only a limited number of political parties are given a real chance at ruling? If that is the case, then the United States is most definitely a dictatorship!

In a real dictatorship there would be no legislative body and would have only one individual that writes/passes law (i.e. dictates). Clearly, there have not been any governments like this since the times of monarchial rule.

In a real democracy, the masses would actually have a chance at making economic decisions that are in their best interest (such as allowing increased labor organization, or ending capitalism altogether). The American people are not given a chance to make economic decisions in our government. Two capitalist political parties control this government (and both are funded by big business), and they work very hard to prevent a third party from having a chance at ruling. Since the two parties are in power, they pass ballot access laws that will keep only them in power for the foreseeable future.

And the United States, like virtually all other countries on this planet, has a representative style government, where the interests of big business are represented.

All that being said, I would support "democracy" in this poll, I don't think anyone would support "dictatorship" (unless they are a real monarchist).

Ultron

Nope.

I didn't ask if you agreed with most forms of Democracy. I asked if you thought it was better than a Dictatorship. I'm not asking you to say you think Democracy is the best thing since the advent of fire.

The question also isn't if you advocate Dictatorships above all else. Just if you like it more than Democracy.

So you can't decide whether or not a representative govt is preferable to despotic govt?

Gawdawful

If one is in a minority, benevolent dictatorship might indeed be better than a pure democracy, but as a whole democracy has it all over dictatorships.


Warren in Oklahoma

Ultron

We're talking about the basic concepts of each type of govt.

Here's an example, which do you like more, milk or soda? Is it 2% milk? Goat milk? Leftist whale milk? Dr. Pepper? Pepsi? Pangean Rhubarb cola?

Trying to find ways to convolute a simple question serves no purpose. If you guys can't figure out what democracy and dictatorships are in a nutshell, you're trying too hard.

Sure it's obvious! A Democracy is a representative govt. A Dictatorship is not.

There are over 100 democracies (or partial democracies) worldwide. Something like 112 or so. In the year 1900 we had 8. Clearly we can see a trend, but that's not the point here.

Capitalism is an economic system. I'm talking political systems. Democracy can have either socialism or capitalism. Your point is not only irrelevant, but moot.

No a dictatorship doesn't have competing parties. A Democracy does. Even if our nation only had one party, that wouldn't make this a dictatorship. Independants can still run.

Furthermore, you can't vote in a dictatorship. In a democracy, people can vote.

Not neccessarily.

Sure but there are plenty of nations who have since then still been dictatorships.

Opinion noted. But that's not a dictatorship.

Sure, and I'm for that. Which is why I voted Democracy, not Dictatorship. But it's not just big business that is represented. Texaco isn't voting, I am. Sure there are special interest groups which pay politicians to vote for them, but that's corruption within a democracy.

You would support a real monarchist form of govt over any type of democracy?

Ultron

You know, if this thread were really pointless, it would have been 14-0, not 10-4.

But we see right here that there are 4 of you that are willing to choose a dictatorship over democracy, just a couple hours after I started the thread.

Krieger

You offered no definition of what you considered "democracy" or "dictatorship" to be, and the meaning of these terms are debated by many people. The reason I made my previous post is because the American media has a long history of accusing countries that are not loyal to Washington of being "dictatorships". When in reality, none of the accused countries were ever dictatorships.

In fact, even France was accused of being "authoritarian" when their government opposed Gulf War II, if I remember correctly, that is why Congress snidely renamed "French Fries" "Freedom Fries", implying that American is some big land of freedom and France is not.




That was a clever retort, but it does not disprove anything in my post.



According to whom?



Quit thinking in abstractly. The economic system of a country has profound influences on that country's government. The whole concept of lobbying and enabling only the rich (or people that sell out to the rich) to be elected to the federal government here in the United States is a perfect example of this. Because of this, the American government is full of "representatives" that only support capitalism and the wealthy elite that control the capitalist economic and political system. It is a capitalist government. All of its policies are meant to benefit the ruling class (whether they be invading other countries for resources or crushing progressive movements).



Good, then at least you agree that Cuba is a democracy. Its government is ran by the Cuban General Assembly, and you do not have to be a Communist Party member to be elected. In fact, only 44% of the General Assembly representatives are CPC members. In the United States Congress, 99% of the "representatives" are members of the two ruling parties.



Care to elaborate?


In your opinion, which nations were they?



In your opinion.



You might call that "corruption", but that has been the very nature of American politics in Washington, throughout the entire history of this nation.



No, why do you ask?

John K. Fitzpatrick

Far from being a dumb question, I think it raises lots of interesting points.

In the late Roman republic, which at 500 years old was extremely complex and even by our standards hierarchical, had a position of Dictator - but that wasn't in charge of everything, and was limited to a single six month term. But overall, their form of government could best be described as a Plutocracy, the dictatorship of the wealthy elite. Cato the Younger is still a hero in certain elite quarters. (i'm working on a post re: Cato the Younger, some of his less savoury quotes)

The founders of the U.S., being land-holding, slave-owning plutocrats-to-be themselves, were huge fans of the Roman Republic, and lifted much of the form and function of the U.S. State from the Roman State. They left out most of the Roman family/clan artifacts, and truncated the ladder to power (which in Rome was intricate and difficult, but an excellent training ground for cunning and alliance building) so that "anyone could be president". But was the result a democracy, or still a plutocratic dictatorship? Not so obvious, when you realize that we still have no constitutional right to vote for the highest office. And what makes the President the "highest office" anyway? That's not some little mistake.

Karl Marx proposed, as a form of democracy, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. (Both terms I think borrowed from Rome).

Even in our own lives, I think we all confront and struggle with when we each deserve to be a dictator, and when some other priority takes precedence. Does that new priority serve the purpose of some minority? Does that minority deserve to have their priority served? When should the Majority Dictatorship give way to numerous Minority Dictatorships?

And perhaps most importantly, what/when is the difference between democratic/dictatorial *choice* and dictatorial/democratic *decision*?

- John

edit: I didn't vote - it's a matter of scale.

xorbie

Here's the problem with democracy: George Bush and people with low IQ who think the Theory of Relativity has to do with inbreeding that voted for him.

Here's the problem with dictatorship: The person/part willing to take power is often exactly the one that should be prevented from using it.

However, if I got to start my own country, it would be a mix of dictatorship and democracy. It would be funny, because people would vote and think their vote actually counted towards anything.

Also, I answered "dictatorship" to your poll, because I think a pure, direct democracy is the worst form of government out there. Period.

Ultron

I'm not sure I have time at the moment for a big one. I'll be back tomorrow or maybe later tonight.

http://www.ccle.fourh.umn.edu/lending.html
The figure I heard before was actually an interview on CSPAN (within this last year) where one educator was talking about we had 8 or 9 at the beginning of the 1900's and as of 2000 there is 112 or so. I don't remember the exact phrase or numbers but it's not far off of what I've claimed. He even gave a website of the results of the research, listing all the countries. If I had the foresight I would have fired up the computer and wrote some of what he said down.

Ultron

And hey, 12-7, looks like my poll continues to be an interesting one. Amazing how many people here prefer Dictatorships to Democracy.