Are we the best democracy in the World? Who is better?

[timmyshine]

Some say Sweden, others Ntherlands. I dont really know

It all depends on what you mean by good democracy - if you mean the society that identifies as 'democratic' that you most like .... that is different from trying to identify the society where either the choice of politicians is most representative of what the electorate want/the society where the people's opinion is most represented at senior government level.....

I like LA and the southern states of america, but I don't think the USA is more democratic than australia for exanple.. so no I don't think we are the best nation at being democratic in the world (as our elections mean that a party who wants to be in power needs only to get 30% of the vote in 20% of consituencies.) but I do think we are one of the best democracies in the world... if you see what I mean..

We use First Past the Post which is not really democratic for a starter as it means that the people's views can be taken to parliament even if they are only 30% of elector

I tell you what......
I am so glad that i am white and from the first world.....
Is that so not PC.

I might add that being white and from the 1st world makes life so much better than being from most other places.

Are we not very lucky people.

NZ has a good mixed member proportional system which is more democratic than the FPP in the USA and UK - you get two votes, one for a person in your local electorate, and one for a party. Half of parliament is made up of those directly voted in, and the other half worked out by the party votes for every party that gets higher than 5% of the vote. It means that regardless of what other people in your electorate vote for, you will always get one vote that still counts.

Define 'best'. The UK is a well-functioning democracy with universal suffrage. We take many civil freedoms for granted... free speech, right to protest, ability to form trades unions, follow different religions etc. It's a wealthy, well-run state, with a strong welfare tradition and many opportunities for betterment. Our electoral system usually provides a speedy and clear result post-election and, since it is normally one party taking the reins, we can usually point to their manifesto afterwards and demand that it is carried out. Accountability & responsibility is therefore direct and immediate. My Belgian friends - 250+ days without a coalition agreement on a government and counting - tell me PR may be 'fairer' but it isn't necessarily 'better'.

I'd say there's more to a 'good democracy' than the style of the voting system.

if you are talking about the uk, then I would say we barely have democracy at all.

I was chatting about this with my husband last night actually.

the system encourages voter apathy because it's a good way to ensure that nothing really changes. that's not democratic, is it? the place is pretty much run by the aristocracy and big business - that's where the power is, not with the people.

we have a token election every 4 or 5 years, which never changes anything.

to me, democracy means that everyone votes and decides who is going to manage the country in the way they (the voters) want it to be managed. Anyone can do it, if they have the support of others who will vote for them

But look at what we've got. Old Boys Club. Gravy Train.

no. I don't think this is democracy at all.

Good brainwashing job by the powerful to convince us that it is though. That way we never do anything about it.

So compulsory voting Hecate? Aus has it, not sure where else does.

But surely Hec, democracy is also allowing people not to care?

"if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice"

I would add to the songwords

Agree Penelope, in NZ democracy is far more democratic, IYSWIM, than in the UK. Not sure if we qualify as the best though. The scandinavian countries seem to have it pretty sorted too.

compulsory voting, well, I am in favour of it but forcing people to vote could be argued to be not democratic I suppose even if there is an abstain box - which there would have to be.

but what's the percentage of people who actually vote? sixty something? thirty something in local elections. that's terrible. Most people don't bother. they moan about the government, but they don't bother to do anything about it (vote in someone else) why is that - because there is no real alternative.

nobody has ever put it better than douglas adams

?On [that] world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.?

?Odd,? said Arthur, ?I thought you said it was a democracy??

?I did,? said Ford, ?It is.?

?So,? said Arthur, hoping he wasn?t sounding ridiculously obtuse, ?why don?t the people get rid of the lizards??

?It honestly doesn?t occur to them,? said Ford. ?They?ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they?ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.?

?You mean they actually vote for the lizards??

?Oh yes,? said Ford with a shrug, ?of course.?

?But,? said Arthur, going for the big one again, ?why??

?Because if they didn?t vote for a lizard,? said Ford, ?the wrong lizard might get in.?

--

except most of us don't even bother voting for any lizard at all. we just accept whatever lizard the 60 odd percent vote for. except that out of that 60 odd percent, how many votes does the 'winner' get? not many. they need to get what, half?

and it doesn't make any difference anyway. the system pretty much runs itself. in the interests of the rich and powerful as it always has done. those in power continue to feather their nests while we all get screwed. regardless the party they belong to, most of them were at the posh schools together.

I don't know how true it is but I have read that tony blair was a member of the young conservatives before deciding his best shot was as leader of the labour party! who was it who said of him that "He's a lawyer, he can argue well from either side"

they don't want to represent the people. they don't want to manage the country in our interests. they want to be very important and get very rich.

that's not democracy.

I bet The Powers already have the next few PMs lined up at eton and oxford and have them in their exclusive clubs, training them.

many of us, not most of us.

re democracy is allowing people not to care - well yes. how awful is that! But my argument is that the system here encourages and actually relies upon voter apathy in order to ensure that nothing ever changes. they don't want change. they have things too good.

I don't think you've been 'encouraged' to be apathetic HecateTheCrone... it seems apathy is your natural state of mind, together with some irrational dislike of anyone that went to a 'posh school' and a suspicion that you're excluded from politics because you're not rich or powerful. Very few people who stand as MP are self-serving and power-crazed and there's nothing to stop you or anyone else running for parliament, if you don't like the choices put forward.

PR wouldn't make what you describe any better, btw. We'd all vote and the resulting MPs would be picked out of a catalogue... making them even less accountable. Do you know who your European MP is? QED...

I'm not apathetic. I vote.

Did you assume that I do not?

glenis willmott.

Democracy is this... 100% of 100 people vote. 55 vote for A, 45 vote for B. A wins. 45 people are unhappy that they are 'not represented' but abide by the result anyway. There is no practical way, even with 100% voting and 100% PR that everyone gets what they want....

not going to answer me then?

also. three words that you should not be hearing when talking about a democracy and how it is run.

House
Of
Lords

oh god. I made the mistake of reading this to my husband. who insists that I type his view.

We should still go back and look at compulsary voting. I know there are those who would argue that not voting shows how democratic we are but as far as I am concerned, freedom comes with responsibility. You must be a responsible person to enjoy the freedoms. It is something that people are only asked to do every few years. To enjoy the freedom you must be responsible and it is the only way. Imagine that you can say you would just pay your taxes if you want. How many would pay taxes? It is a social responsibility and that is why there are laws to ensure that you pay your taxes oh god I am losing the will to type here we have a system where people want all the freedoms but none of the responsibilities required to protect those freedoms.

Didn't assume you don't vote at all... but your attitude is evidently one of apathy, pessimism and 'what's the point?'. Regarding the House of Lords. Now that the hereditary element has been dispensed with, what remains is an appointed chamber of experienced lawmakers to provide a final check to legislation for the elected government. Not necessarily inconsistent with democracy.

the changes to the house of lords is like rearranging the positioning of the deckchairs on the Titanic. according to my husband

If they are that independent, why not advertise the posts? give the job description and person specs to price waterhouse cooper and let them conduct the interviews to appoint the most experienced lawmakers.

also. appointed by who? accountable to who? right now?

and even now, with your token newbie, how many are not lord so and so son of lord so and so son of lord so and so son of lord so and so...

No, I vote. I do what I can. I'll always be there sticking my 2pence in but I am a realist. Every country is the same. Some are more blatent than others, but if you think that we are not all worthless drones to them, you are hopelessly naive.

you know. that last bit is a bit personal. I apologise for that. we are discussing an issue, not getting personal with each other.

you are not personally hopelessly naive. It is my view that the world is run a certian way, with certain interests being protected at all costs and I think that people don't generally see it and I think this is naive of them.

I think a Parlimentary system works better than a Presidential one - to me having all the power vested in one person is a little scary.

Greece has a compulsory vote.

It doesn't discourage apathy, as people are very good at ignoring the law, or conveniently being geographically too far away from their polling stations to be able to vote.

also, people I've talked to resent being told they HAVE to vote, especially when (as they see it) there isn't much to choose between.