View Single Post
Old August 14 2012, 08:37 PM   #94
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Is the Federation a True Democracy? And How Did It Reach That Poin

Timo wrote: View Post
The ill-defined, wishy-washy structure of the Federation would be a natural habitat for a president or three, in the sense of "president of the society", "president of the board", "president of the council".
The problem with that is that he's explicitly identified as the President of the United Federation of Planets, not President of the Federation Council. He's explicitly identified as president of the state.

We can of course decide that the two onscreen Presidents, from ST4 and DS9,
Three onscreen presidents: the Human from ST4 (named Hiram Roth in the novels); the Grazerite from DS9 named Jaresh-Inyo; and the Efrosian from ST6 (named Ra-ghoratreii in the novels).

Not counting the onscreen-but-illegible biography of Jonathan Archer in ENT's "In A Mirror, Darkly," which established that he became an early Federation President.

cbspock wrote: View Post
We are a representative republic. We are not a democracy.
You need to re-check your political science vocabulary. A representative republic (that is, a republic whose officials are popularly elected) is a type of democracy.

Democracy is MOB RULE
I've never heard of a mob that gets in line to cast ballots after having been registered prior to a pre-scheduled decision-making period.

cbspock wrote: View Post
No the Electoral College is A GREAT SYSTEM.
No system that allows a person to become president without the support of a majority or a plurality of votes cast is "great" or morally legitimate.

We should go back to the way Senators were originally picked, by the STATES.
Yes, let's deny a voice to the people in the upper chamber of Congress and let the state elites make the decisions without their vote. It's completely rational and not the least bit un-egalitarian or ripe for corruption.

Now both the house and senate are formed from the same pool.
No, they are not -- not unless the state's population is so small as to only allow for a single at-large House district. A Senator by definition represents the entire state; a Representative, only her local district.

cbspock wrote: View Post
Our constitution isn't flawed,
Of course it's flawed. All political systems are flawed, because (to paraphrase Alexander Hamilton) if men were angels, no government would be needed. Trying to pretend that a constitution that allowed slavery and has had to be amended 27 times "not flawed" is just silly. This is nothing more than constitutional idolatry and ancestor worship.

You need to read Ameritopia, American Creation, Road to Disunion, Liberty and Tyranny.
Sure, if you read Lies My Teacher Told Me, A People's History of the United States, The Shock Doctrine, and Death of the Liberal Class.

R. Star wrote: View Post
Calling the Founding Fathers oligarchs? Yeah... not taking anything Sci says seriously anymore.
I'm sorry the thought bothers you, but they fit the definition just fine. They were wealthy, land-owning white men (many of whom, like Jefferson, had inherited their wealth and status), who had attained their roles in colonial governments by being "elected" by other wealthy land-owning white men, and who designed a government that only gave a voice to wealthy, land-owning white men. Hell, they even designed the Constitution with the specific intent of making sure one particular man (George Washington) would become the first president. They fit the definition of oligarchs to a T.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote