Venezuela: Democracy in danger?

Which is more mature and stable against the blowing winds of demagoguery? A system that starts with the observation that a government is, properly speaking, formed by the people and granted certain powers, and none others, and any changes to that require supermajority?

Or a vox populi vox dei system where whoever wins a simple majority (or even just a plurality) assumes all power imaginable?


I'll let you be the judge. Hint: A study of human history is useful.

You explained that much clearer.
 
Which is more mature and stable against the blowing winds of demagoguery? A system that starts with the observation that a government is, properly speaking, formed by the people and granted certain powers, and none others, and any changes to that require supermajority?

Or a vox populi vox dei system where whoever wins a simple majority (or even just a plurality) assumes all power imaginable?


I'll let you be the judge. Hint: A study of human history is useful.

this is very interesting :)

while i agree that peoples decisions are not always the smarter decisions.
I think this problem more stems from a lack of education or a lack of information.
the more power the people hold, the better and more information they need to base theyr decision on. So we need proper information. information like FOX news is telling its viewers it gets.
spinnfree facts.

I would never want to miss my ability to take direct influence on my government or the laws etc. Nor would i ever accept a 2 party system.
i suspect it leads to more black and white thinking.

US people seem to be pretty happy with theyr Democracy. they should also accept that others form theyr own ways, and are happy with it :)
 
Last edited:
Venezuala and Switzerland are nothing like each other and I won't continue down the path of trying to make comparisons between the two. You are demonstrating exactly what I'm talking about in this post. Just like another thread comparing Venezuala to Dubai, it's very easy to break off a piece of the debate and say "look, this is exactly what they are doing here" even though there is nothing even close to comparible about the countries in any other way.

Venezuela and Switzerland are in many ways comapreable, especialy theyr democracy.....

but i never claimed them to be perfect copys.

you do like it is comapring apples to pears, its not its more like
comparing Melrose apples to Liberty apples
 
Last edited:
Venezuela and Switzerland are in many ways comapreable, especialy theyr democracy.....

but i never claimed them to be perfect copys.

you do like it is comapring apples to pears, its not its more like
comparing Melrose apples to Liberty apples

So, if you're talking about the bugs that eat on Melrose apples, why bring up the Liberty apples? Does both fruit excel in the same climate? Do they grow at the same rate? Do they have the same taste? Are they suseptible to the same parasites or thieves stealing them from the orchard?:D You don't have to answer that.
 
So, if you're talking about the bugs that eat on Melrose apples, why bring up the Liberty apples? Does both fruit excel in the same climate? Do they grow at the same rate? Do they have the same taste? Are they suseptible to the same parasites or thieves stealing them from the orchard?:D You don't have to answer that.

To find out why the bugs eat Melrose apples and not the Liberty apple.
but i guess you asume bugs hate Liberty :D
 
Demos = People
Kratia = governance

in a Direct/Participatory democracy, the people have more influence than in a representative democracy, when the system is working properly.

and nowadays, Demos, includes alot more people than it did in ancient greece
 
Last edited:
And? What are you saying with those links? If you are trying to say Venezuala is a participatory democracy, which political variant would that be?

yes Venezuela is a Participatory Democracy
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#Switzerland

Funny, look at the three countries used as examples.

yes the USA is on its way. :)

There are now a total of 24 U.S. states with constitutionally-defined, citizen-initiated, direct democracy governance components (Zimmerman, December 1999). In the United States, for the most part only one-time majorities are required (simple majority of those voting) to approve any of these components.
24 of how many?
 
I have to say? We originally were NOT a direct democracy, and I'm very unhappy we're becoming one.

Because the will of 50.1% should never > 49.9%

(Also, at least in washintgon, people can abuse the initiatve system. Sigh.)

i find the "Because the will of 50.1% should never > 49.9%" argument a very good argument, that is very important in a democracy.

but that is not what direct democracy is about.
lets say for a new law to be implemented. in a representative democracy, the people cannot directly say yes or no, Representants will do that.

but you could have a direct democracy that would alow a new law in a national vote only if it gets 75% or any percentage.

i see it as, the people have a direct say, rather via proxys aka representants.

the History of venezuela showed that in theyr representative democracy, the system was abused so only a minority had a say and the majority of people suffered.
And with the new Participatory democracy they are trying to change that, well they did already.
 
You know of course, that direct democracies have a history of self destructing?
So if 75% of the people of Venzuela decide to deprive a specific group of it's rights, that is OK?
The genius of the US system is that it protects the people from themselves.
 
You know of course, that direct democracies have a history of self destructing?
So if 75% of the people of Venzuela decide to deprive a specific group of it's rights, that is OK?
The genius of the US system is that it protects the people from themselves.

our constitution prevents this.
 

Back
Top Bottom