Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Would you give up democracy

Options
  • 25-02-2020 1:17pm
    #1
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,504 ✭✭✭✭


    Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement).

    Singapore is described as a flawed democracy, yet by a host of metrics, they do very well 7th highest GDP per capita in the world, one of the lowest unemployment rates among developed countries, 90% homeownership etc.

    Due to how its is governed and administered the have a sort of enforced multiculturalism which means there are no ethnic enclaves plus they provide a very high standard of living for its citizens.

    Would anyone be prepared to give up democracy to have such a society?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Time
    Registered Users Posts: 993 ✭✭✭Time


    mariaalice wrote: »
    Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement).

    Singapore is described as a flawed democracy, yet by a host of metrics, they do very well 7th highest GDP per capita in the world, one of the lowest unemployment rates among developed countries, 90% homeownership etc.

    Due to how its is governed and administered the have a sort of enforced multiculturalism which means there are no ethnic enclaves plus they provide a very high standard of living for its citizens.

    Would anyone be prepared to give up democracy to have such a society?

    Are the systems they have in place in Singapore and democracy mutually exclusive? I'm not aware of their restrictions but i can see an argument to be made where a party runs on a platform of introducing XYZ and wins a majority before implementing XYZ. As long as fair and free elections continued i don't see how that would be considered to be undemocratic


  • Options
    #3
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 14,312 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Maybe for a while until we got some of our planning issues sorted - a new metro, demolishing huge areas of our cities to build high rise, etc., rewilding parts of the country... I can but dream.


  • Options
    #4
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    No, I wouldn't give up democracy to have a high GDP. Would Singapore have a low GBP if it was a democracy.
    This question doesn't really make sense as there are about 500 examples of non democratic countries being a pile of ****e.


  • Options
    #5
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,504 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    No, I wouldn't give up democracy to have a high GDP. Would Singapore have a low GBP if it was a democracy.
    This question doesn't really make sense as there are about 500 examples of non democratic countries being a pile of ****e.

    It's not a dictatorship and there may be a high degree of compliance due to cultural issue, but for example, the fact that they do not let ethnic enclaves develope must mean they have a more cohesive society which in turn has an effect on its economic sucesses?


  • Options
    #6
    TuringBot47
    Registered Users Posts: 991 ✭✭✭TuringBot47


    Voters tend to vote for their own selfish needs.
    So democracy reflects that, not many people vote for more taxes to improve infrastructure or water charges to improve the water supply over the next 20 years especially if climate change could threaten in.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Granny15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,129 ✭✭✭Granny15


    mariaalice wrote: »
    It's not a dictatorship and there may be a high degree of compliance due to cultural issue, but for example, the fact that they do not let ethnic enclaves develope must mean they have a more cohesive society which in turn has an effect on its economic sucesses?

    You mean an ex colony trying to break free of it's past rulers?

    I think I'll stick to being a Republic and not have an all powerful head of state.


  • Options
    #8
    Chris_Heilong
    Registered Users Posts: 4,974 ✭✭✭Chris_Heilong


    Democracy, Capitalism and free speech are the best and fairest systems humans have ever come up with and although there are flaws there is always a chance to improve within these systems so no, I would not give up democracy as even if I disagree with those in power now there is always a chance some I do like will get in.


  • Options
    #9
    TuringBot47
    Registered Users Posts: 991 ✭✭✭TuringBot47


    Chris_Heilong wrote: »
    Democracy, Capitalism and free speech are the best and fairest systems humans have ever come up with

    Capitalism isn't fair.
    Don't get me wrong, I've worked all my life.


    But uncontrolled capitalism can ultimately create monopolies or companies with as much or more power than some governments.
    Capitalism also creates vast amounts of waste.
    100 different companies churning out competing products, lowering the quality for profit, being legally bound to chase profits for shareholders...
    Can be quite damaging.
    Also, as artificial intelligence starts to take over traditional middle class jobs in the next 50 years, the middle class will get demoted down too.
    The wealth gap of mega companies will just continue, until governments can tax them severely to hand out welfare to more people.


    In some ways, I like the Chinese idea of social credits, scoring individuals based on their behaviour/criminal records and rewarding/punishing accordingly. Now China is far from a human rights role model, but criminals on the dole expecting a free house should be way down the list compared to decent working people.


  • Options
    #10
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,511 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Democracy is currently the least bad option.


  • Options
    #11
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    TheValeyard wrote: »
    Democracy is currently the least bad option.

    Except for the version of socialism that works.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,990 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    AllForIt wrote: »
    Except for the version of socialism that works.

    We live in a social democracy.


  • Options
    #13
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    listermint wrote: »
    We live in a social democracy.

    We live in a capitalist social democracy.


  • Options
    #14
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users Posts: 6,231 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    TuringBot47 wrote: »
    Voters tend to vote for their own selfish needs.
    So democracy reflects that, not many people vote for more taxes to improve infrastructure or water charges to improve the water supply over the next 20 years especially if climate change could threaten in.


    Yet we have loads of taxes and infrastructure.


  • Options
    #15
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 21,095 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    AllForIt wrote: »
    We live in a capitalist social democracy.

    Like China.


  • Options
    #16
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,990 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    AllForIt wrote: »
    We live in a capitalist social democracy.

    Is there any other kind or is this semantics.


  • Options
    #17
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    Like China.

    No, China is a now an unusual communist-capitalist country.


  • Options
    #18
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 14,312 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    The problem with capitalism is that it's hell bent on consumption which can only lead to disaster and war etc. So it doesn't work either. Although impossible in reality, some form of communism is the only way I can think of that we can survive.


  • Options
    #19
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 21,095 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    The problem with capitalism is that it's hell bent on consumption which can only lead to disaster and war etc. So it doesn't work either. Although impossible in reality, some form of communism is the only way I can think of that we can survive.

    China does ghost estates far better than we ever did.



  • Options
    #20
    amadangomor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,148 ✭✭✭amadangomor


    The limitations of Democracy are even more evident in the modern world where social media can heavily influence people.

    We are in a post fact world which is scary and has allowed populations to be manipulated by clever social media use. Trump, Brexit and Sinn Fein are examples of this recently(not trying to cause an argument here with the last one one but Sinn Fein have leveraged social media to their advantage hugely and it does involve manipulating people).


  • Options
    #21
    flazio
    Registered Users Posts: 13,169 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    The thing about capitalism is it gives the cream a reason to rise to the top.
    If you are the brightest, sharpest, hardest studying, you'll only do that if you can see a goal at the end. Big bank account, nicer house, car, partner etc. These are rewards for smart work. Not always hard work, but always smart work. When you want the best person in the best job. You have to incentivise them to apply. And if you are particularly bright, you need a reason to bring out the best you've got.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,673 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Give up on democracy? You make it sound like we are losing out!

    First of all there is no democracy. I/We vote for a local representative, then there is the party whip that tells them what to do. Essentially the cabinet does as it want's and appeases a few Healy-Rae's along the way.

    Now lets say the cabinet actually want to reform Health. Well that'll never happen as as soon as they try suddenly it's #istandwithnurses and the boys say to themselves, jaysus I need this job and need to get reelected, we better wind our necks in.

    I reckon if Ireland was the 3rd Reich Hitler would not have been able to sort out health.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #23
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 21,095 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Feisar wrote: »
    Give up on democracy? You make it sound like we are losing out!

    First of all there is no democracy. I/We vote for a local representative, then there is the party whip that tells them what to do. Essentially the cabinet does as it want's and appeases a few Healy-Rae's along the way.

    Now lets say the cabinet actually want to reform Health. Well that'll never happen as as soon as they try suddenly it's #istandwithnurses and the boys say to themselves, jaysus I need this job and need to get reelected, we better wind our necks in.

    I reckon if Ireland was the 3rd Reich Hitler would not have been able to sort out health.

    Life expectancy, infant mortality, and the general health of the overall population are the only real measures of the state of our health services. On all counts it has shown outstanding improvements over the last few decades.


  • Options
    #24
    Chris_Heilong
    Registered Users Posts: 4,974 ✭✭✭Chris_Heilong


    amadangomor wrote: »
    The limitations of Democracy are even more evident in the modern world where social media can heavily influence people.

    We are in a post fact world which is scary and has allowed populations to be manipulated by clever social media use. Trump, Brexit and Sinn Fein are examples of this recently(not trying to cause an argument here with the last one one but Sinn Fein have leveraged social media to their advantage hugely and it does involve manipulating people).

    It also depends on who's version of "facts" you choose to believe. Ideology has a way of bending facts to fit a narrative.

    people tend to be more informed now than they were in the past, the reason why the same parties were voted in again and again was due to the publics ignorance about the consequences of voting in a particular party and so would just vote whoever was in before as they did not know any better.


  • Options
    #25
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The democratic system is still relatively new, and hasn't been revised to consider lessons learned over the last 1-2 hundred years. The problem isn't with democracy as such. The problem is the unwillingness to scrap a broken system, and attempt to find/implement an improved version of it. A removal of influence for lobbyists, corporate entities, etc. The implementation of accountability for politicians, and a better system to reduce the political movements to reduce voters power. A mix of old and new initiatives to take the best from older systems, and combine them with democracy.

    We really just need to start again. Recognize the flaws of the system as something that can be improved upon.


  • Options
    #26
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 19,341 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    flazio wrote: »
    The thing about capitalism is it gives the cream a reason to rise to the top.
    If you are the brightest, sharpest, hardest studying, you'll only do that if you can see a goal at the end. Big bank account, nicer house, car, partner etc. These are rewards for smart work. Not always hard work, but always smart work. When you want the best person in the best job. You have to incentivise them to apply. And if you are particularly bright, you need a reason to bring out the best you've got.

    So much naivety in one post. Well done.


Advertisement