Democracy & Responsibility
Of all the forms of government in existence it is, I think, universally agreed that despite its many weaknesses the liberal democracy practiced in the United States and many other countries is the best. In a highly technical, liberal democracy, such as our own, how can we citizens, burdened with the great responsibility of active participation in decision making, prepare ourselves properly?
It seems to me that we must develop a better way.
I am a C-Span junkie. Fellow junkies understand my meaning but for non-junkies I will say this. C-Span has a seven-day a week three-hour program from 7 AM to 10 AM that encourages calls from viewers. C-Span viewers are generally quite interested in current event especially political matters. By watching C-Span the viewer develops an opinion of human nature as it manifests itself on the show. This view causes me to conclude that it is human nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant to such an extent as to cause one to wonder about the future of a liberal democracy. However, by looking in the rear view mirror one has to conclude also that all things considered we have managed to get this far without blowing ourselves up. Hope is evidently eternal and we shall continue with the trust that somehow we will muddle through.
While hoping that we can muddle through, it is also human nature to attempt to improve our chances by analyzing the situation and attempting to develop ways of improving the odds. What can we do to improve the odds that the world will still be turning when the year 2200 comes to be? Possibly, since we will all be gone along with many generations removed from us, none of us really gives a %^&$(.
Insofar as providing good workers for a high technology work environment, our present educational system seems to have performed at least adequately. Insofar as creating well developed critical thinking individuals capable of efficiently working with multilogical problems our present educational system is a disaster. This is obvious by noting that our technological ability is far outpacing our ability to wisely utilize the technology in a responsible manner.
If we were able to keep the work force well trained so as to maintain our advanced technology while adding a significant amount of education designed to develop the critical thinking skills we might have an answer to our dilemma. Our schools K through 12 and our colleges are attempting to develop a much richer education enhanced in the area of Critical Thinking and Socratic dialogue already. From what I can understand the advancement in this effort is slow and halting. Training teachers capable of teaching such disciplines presents a massive problem.
Can we wait until nature takes its course and in four or five generations we might have produced enough critically thinking adults to run the world in a responsible fashion? The recent disaster in New Orleans could serve as a wake up call to the catastrophes resulting from the old ‘head in the sand’ syndrome.
It is obvious to me that we must accept our responsibly now and the way that we can do that is to become serious minded individuals and take upon our self the responsibility of becoming a population capable of better understanding our self and our world.
In my opinion we can do this by utilizing the brain power of our adult population. It seems to me that our adult population refuses to use the magnificent learning ability that lay dormant in our skulls. I suggest that there is a great deal we can do to arouse our curiosity and become adult learners so that we can better understand what is going on so that we can uphold our responsibility as citizens of a liberal democracy.
Quote: "All men, like all nations, are tested twice in the moral realm: first by what they do, then by what they make of what they do. The condition of guilt, a sense of one's own guilt, denotes a kind of second chance. Men are, as if by a kind of grace, given a chance to repay to the living that it is they find themselves owing the dead."
"Coming to Terms with Vietnam," by Peter Marin, Harpers, Dec. 1980.
Democracy Responsibility
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Democracy Responsibility
coberst wrote: I am a C-Span junkie. Fellow junkies understand my meaning but for non-junkies I will say this. C-Span has a seven-day a week three-hour program from 7 AM to 10 AM that encourages calls from viewers. C-Span viewers are generally quite interested in current event especially political matters. By watching C-Span the viewer develops an opinion of human nature as it manifests itself on the show. This view causes me to conclude that it is human nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant to such an extent as to cause one to wonder about the future of a liberal democracy. However, by looking in the rear view mirror one has to conclude also that all things considered we have managed to get this far without blowing ourselves up. Hope is evidently eternal and we shall continue with the trust that somehow we will muddle through.
I suggest you adjust your view slightly: it is C-SPAN caller nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant. That probably applies to the majority of talk-radio callers as well.
In the US I believe many people have bought into the idea that there will never be the ideal candidate. Indeed, a desirable candidate cannot win unless he/she is bankrolled by one or the other side of our controlling party. Therefore rather than voting for the most desirable candidate, Americans vote for the one of two controlling-party-approved that is least undesirable. The reasoning is that the most desirable cannot win, so vote for the lesser of the two evils. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Evil wins.
I wish that we could magically shed our distrust of our fellow voters. If we each voted for the person we truly feel is the ideal, and trust that everyone else will vote for their ideal candidate, the Republican/Democrat Party would collapse into cynical dust.
I suggest you adjust your view slightly: it is C-SPAN caller nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant. That probably applies to the majority of talk-radio callers as well.
In the US I believe many people have bought into the idea that there will never be the ideal candidate. Indeed, a desirable candidate cannot win unless he/she is bankrolled by one or the other side of our controlling party. Therefore rather than voting for the most desirable candidate, Americans vote for the one of two controlling-party-approved that is least undesirable. The reasoning is that the most desirable cannot win, so vote for the lesser of the two evils. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Evil wins.
I wish that we could magically shed our distrust of our fellow voters. If we each voted for the person we truly feel is the ideal, and trust that everyone else will vote for their ideal candidate, the Republican/Democrat Party would collapse into cynical dust.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Democracy Responsibility
There are other TV shows and radio programs that encourage callers and their viewpoints besides C-Span. I would rather peruse various channels, then take just one slant on current topics of interest.
Also, I do not believe in the United States we live in a democracy, but a republic. Until some basic foundations are changed, we are not a true democracy. Even Ancient Greece, the example of democracy, was not a true democracy, with their limited voting base of 300-600 male citizens through the Classical Period.
Also, I do not believe in the United States we live in a democracy, but a republic. Until some basic foundations are changed, we are not a true democracy. Even Ancient Greece, the example of democracy, was not a true democracy, with their limited voting base of 300-600 male citizens through the Classical Period.
Democracy Responsibility
chonsigirl wrote: I do not believe in the United States we live in a democracy, but a republic. Until some basic foundations are changed, we are not a true democracy.
From The Myth of Seperation by David Barton, Chapter 15, Page 229
"Although today we are accustomed to hearing that we are a democracy, such was never the intent. The form of government was a republic; not a democracy (remember: we pledge allegiance to a republic, not a democracy); there is a definite difference between the two.
A democracy operates by direct majority vote, or what the Founders and early historians described as a "mobocracy." When an issue is to be decided, the entire population votes on it and the majority wins and rules. A democracy is a series of referendum votes based on the predominant popular opinion at the time.
A republic differs in that the general population elects representatives who then pass laws to govern the nation. In a republic, although a majority vote of the elected representatives will determine a policy, the minority can have influence on the majority decision; compromises are worked out whereby the majority rules with consideration given to minority feelings. Democracy is rule by majority feelings; a republic is rule by law.
Our form of government contains some elements of democracy. There are occasions when the people do have referendum or direct votes on certain state or national issues and the people do select, by simple majority vote, their chief executive and their representatives, who then act in accordance with fixed laws. For this we might be termed a democratic-republic, but not a democracy."
From The Myth of Seperation by David Barton, Chapter 15, Page 229
"Although today we are accustomed to hearing that we are a democracy, such was never the intent. The form of government was a republic; not a democracy (remember: we pledge allegiance to a republic, not a democracy); there is a definite difference between the two.
A democracy operates by direct majority vote, or what the Founders and early historians described as a "mobocracy." When an issue is to be decided, the entire population votes on it and the majority wins and rules. A democracy is a series of referendum votes based on the predominant popular opinion at the time.
A republic differs in that the general population elects representatives who then pass laws to govern the nation. In a republic, although a majority vote of the elected representatives will determine a policy, the minority can have influence on the majority decision; compromises are worked out whereby the majority rules with consideration given to minority feelings. Democracy is rule by majority feelings; a republic is rule by law.
Our form of government contains some elements of democracy. There are occasions when the people do have referendum or direct votes on certain state or national issues and the people do select, by simple majority vote, their chief executive and their representatives, who then act in accordance with fixed laws. For this we might be termed a democratic-republic, but not a democracy."
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" - Mahatma Gandhi
Democracy Responsibility
coberst wrote: Democracy & Responsibility
Of all the forms of government in existence it is, I think, universally agreed that despite its many weaknesses the liberal democracy practiced in the United States and many other countries is the best. In a highly technical, liberal democracy, such as our own, how can we citizens, burdened with the great responsibility of active participation in decision making, prepare ourselves properly?
It seems to me that we must develop a better way.
I am a C-Span junkie. Fellow junkies understand my meaning but for non-junkies I will say this. C-Span has a seven-day a week three-hour program from 7 AM to 10 AM that encourages calls from viewers. C-Span viewers are generally quite interested in current event especially political matters. By watching C-Span the viewer develops an opinion of human nature as it manifests itself on the show. This view causes me to conclude that it is human nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant to such an extent as to cause one to wonder about the future of a liberal democracy. However, by looking in the rear view mirror one has to conclude also that all things considered we have managed to get this far without blowing ourselves up. Hope is evidently eternal and we shall continue with the trust that somehow we will muddle through.
While hoping that we can muddle through, it is also human nature to attempt to improve our chances by analyzing the situation and attempting to develop ways of improving the odds. What can we do to improve the odds that the world will still be turning when the year 2200 comes to be? Possibly, since we will all be gone along with many generations removed from us, none of us really gives a %^&$(.
Insofar as providing good workers for a high technology work environment, our present educational system seems to have performed at least adequately. Insofar as creating well developed critical thinking individuals capable of efficiently working with multilogical problems our present educational system is a disaster. This is obvious by noting that our technological ability is far outpacing our ability to wisely utilize the technology in a responsible manner.
If we were able to keep the work force well trained so as to maintain our advanced technology while adding a significant amount of education designed to develop the critical thinking skills we might have an answer to our dilemma. Our schools K through 12 and our colleges are attempting to develop a much richer education enhanced in the area of Critical Thinking and Socratic dialogue already. From what I can understand the advancement in this effort is slow and halting. Training teachers capable of teaching such disciplines presents a massive problem.
Can we wait until nature takes its course and in four or five generations we might have produced enough critically thinking adults to run the world in a responsible fashion? The recent disaster in New Orleans could serve as a wake up call to the catastrophes resulting from the old ‘head in the sand’ syndrome.
It is obvious to me that we must accept our responsibly now and the way that we can do that is to become serious minded individuals and take upon our self the responsibility of becoming a population capable of better understanding our self and our world.
In my opinion we can do this by utilizing the brain power of our adult population. It seems to me that our adult population refuses to use the magnificent learning ability that lay dormant in our skulls. I suggest that there is a great deal we can do to arouse our curiosity and become adult learners so that we can better understand what is going on so that we can uphold our responsibility as citizens of a liberal democracy.
Quote: "All men, like all nations, are tested twice in the moral realm: first by what they do, then by what they make of what they do. The condition of guilt, a sense of one's own guilt, denotes a kind of second chance. Men are, as if by a kind of grace, given a chance to repay to the living that it is they find themselves owing the dead."
"Coming to Terms with Vietnam," by Peter Marin, Harpers, Dec. 1980.
It's unfortunate that this country (USA) that we live in does not have a higher percentage of it's citizens that vote or show any interest in government or world affairs other that what they may OVERHEAR on the 6 PM news.
Of all the forms of government in existence it is, I think, universally agreed that despite its many weaknesses the liberal democracy practiced in the United States and many other countries is the best. In a highly technical, liberal democracy, such as our own, how can we citizens, burdened with the great responsibility of active participation in decision making, prepare ourselves properly?
It seems to me that we must develop a better way.
I am a C-Span junkie. Fellow junkies understand my meaning but for non-junkies I will say this. C-Span has a seven-day a week three-hour program from 7 AM to 10 AM that encourages calls from viewers. C-Span viewers are generally quite interested in current event especially political matters. By watching C-Span the viewer develops an opinion of human nature as it manifests itself on the show. This view causes me to conclude that it is human nature to be irrational, biased, prejudiced and ignorant to such an extent as to cause one to wonder about the future of a liberal democracy. However, by looking in the rear view mirror one has to conclude also that all things considered we have managed to get this far without blowing ourselves up. Hope is evidently eternal and we shall continue with the trust that somehow we will muddle through.
While hoping that we can muddle through, it is also human nature to attempt to improve our chances by analyzing the situation and attempting to develop ways of improving the odds. What can we do to improve the odds that the world will still be turning when the year 2200 comes to be? Possibly, since we will all be gone along with many generations removed from us, none of us really gives a %^&$(.
Insofar as providing good workers for a high technology work environment, our present educational system seems to have performed at least adequately. Insofar as creating well developed critical thinking individuals capable of efficiently working with multilogical problems our present educational system is a disaster. This is obvious by noting that our technological ability is far outpacing our ability to wisely utilize the technology in a responsible manner.
If we were able to keep the work force well trained so as to maintain our advanced technology while adding a significant amount of education designed to develop the critical thinking skills we might have an answer to our dilemma. Our schools K through 12 and our colleges are attempting to develop a much richer education enhanced in the area of Critical Thinking and Socratic dialogue already. From what I can understand the advancement in this effort is slow and halting. Training teachers capable of teaching such disciplines presents a massive problem.
Can we wait until nature takes its course and in four or five generations we might have produced enough critically thinking adults to run the world in a responsible fashion? The recent disaster in New Orleans could serve as a wake up call to the catastrophes resulting from the old ‘head in the sand’ syndrome.
It is obvious to me that we must accept our responsibly now and the way that we can do that is to become serious minded individuals and take upon our self the responsibility of becoming a population capable of better understanding our self and our world.
In my opinion we can do this by utilizing the brain power of our adult population. It seems to me that our adult population refuses to use the magnificent learning ability that lay dormant in our skulls. I suggest that there is a great deal we can do to arouse our curiosity and become adult learners so that we can better understand what is going on so that we can uphold our responsibility as citizens of a liberal democracy.
Quote: "All men, like all nations, are tested twice in the moral realm: first by what they do, then by what they make of what they do. The condition of guilt, a sense of one's own guilt, denotes a kind of second chance. Men are, as if by a kind of grace, given a chance to repay to the living that it is they find themselves owing the dead."
"Coming to Terms with Vietnam," by Peter Marin, Harpers, Dec. 1980.
It's unfortunate that this country (USA) that we live in does not have a higher percentage of it's citizens that vote or show any interest in government or world affairs other that what they may OVERHEAR on the 6 PM news.