Post by Magatsu Taito on Jan 12, 2008 7:40:04 GMT -5
I usually view competence as having nothing to do with how a person looks. Sure, we tend to believe people with glasses to be intelligent, but that has nothing to do with reality. To see if someone is competent you just have to look at political experience, at least in this case.
I agree that there is also a chance that whoever is elected based on competence could of course also abuse their power, but I think there is quite an easy way to prevent it, or at least lessen the chances of it. Though this requires a coalition government, which from what I know has never existed in the US. A coalition government of course consists of several political parties, which means that they all have to work together to accomplish their goals, and this should lessen the chances of power abuse.
In your system I think a switch of power from the President to the Senate would be a good idea, though I'll be dammed if I know how that would be accomplished.
Good points mostly, though I wouldn't agree that every political system is a democracy. After all, if the people lack the knowledge to grasp political concepts, there is hardly any chance of them approving of the system, or disproving it for that matter.
The idea of Revolution must exist before it can be implemented, so in the oldest society's where there never was any Revolutions, did the people approve of their rulers? Or maybe they just didn't know better? I wouldn't call a society where people are mislead into believing a ruler a democracy though.
Democracy can only exist when a majority grasps the concept of it, you might say. Which of course also means that if a majority does not grasp the concept of it, what then? Sure, there tends to be a view on right and wrong in most cultures, but in the western ones ours is that of the churches for the most part.
Maybe we need a despot as our ruler until we have enough knowledge to make a revolution?
What I do know is that I'm going to die unless I stop writing soon...
I will never agree with you on National Treasure though
I agree that there is also a chance that whoever is elected based on competence could of course also abuse their power, but I think there is quite an easy way to prevent it, or at least lessen the chances of it. Though this requires a coalition government, which from what I know has never existed in the US. A coalition government of course consists of several political parties, which means that they all have to work together to accomplish their goals, and this should lessen the chances of power abuse.
In your system I think a switch of power from the President to the Senate would be a good idea, though I'll be dammed if I know how that would be accomplished.
Good points mostly, though I wouldn't agree that every political system is a democracy. After all, if the people lack the knowledge to grasp political concepts, there is hardly any chance of them approving of the system, or disproving it for that matter.
The idea of Revolution must exist before it can be implemented, so in the oldest society's where there never was any Revolutions, did the people approve of their rulers? Or maybe they just didn't know better? I wouldn't call a society where people are mislead into believing a ruler a democracy though.
Democracy can only exist when a majority grasps the concept of it, you might say. Which of course also means that if a majority does not grasp the concept of it, what then? Sure, there tends to be a view on right and wrong in most cultures, but in the western ones ours is that of the churches for the most part.
Maybe we need a despot as our ruler until we have enough knowledge to make a revolution?
What I do know is that I'm going to die unless I stop writing soon...
I will never agree with you on National Treasure though
