Is American Democracy in shambles?

[Simard]

Why does it seem that American democracy is in shambles? I am a Canadian citizen who is extremely concerned with the direction Bush is taking the world. I have, thus, been paying allot of attention to American politics as of late. I am becoming convinced that open and sincere dialog is not possible in American political debates (at least as these debates appear in the major media networks)if one is interested in wining an election. It seems that the strongest most reasonable argument does not win out. Rather, the argument that is better at embarrassing and distorting the opponents position wins. How can you have a free election when you don't even know the real positions from which you can choose. Please convince I'm wrong

[Shoedogg]

1. I'd love to convince you,

but you aren't wrong.

We're in deep trouble down here.

[Nevernose]

2. I suspect that it's ALWAYS been in shambles

We ain't got an exactly clean track record, do we?

[Maat]

3. The thing is, as you can see...

DUers (members of this Board) acces alternative media -- foreign press, internet sites, and progressive radio (sometimes via the internet). We will do our best here to elect Kerry in November, a man most of believe will take the country in a better direction.

[Simard]

5. Hope you are right

I hope you are right. I wish I could do more to get involved down there.

[Nevernose]

6. Adlai Stevenson

Hell YES I will vote for Kerry, as well as doing everything in my power to get other people to the polls in November, too.

Ever heard the story of Adlai Stevenson, though? IIRC, when he was told (in '56) that he had the majority of intellectuals supporting him, he replied, "Yes, but what about the other 99% of Americans?"

This is the same country that elected Wilson, Hoover, Nixon, Reagan, Eisenhower, and both Bushes. I like to remain positive about things (Clinton, Carter, Kennedy, and Roosevelt), but if things went the worst possible way, I wouldn't exactly be surprised. ;-)

[Simard]

10. American intellectuals

The thing that shocks me the most is that the US has some of the most progressive intellectuals in the world today. Noam Chomsky, John Rawls (although he recently died he still has a large following)are a couple of examples. Unfortunately, these intellectuals get no press.

[Bread and Circus]

16. That's because they don't have boobs

Boobs sell and what sells is what's covered.

[Bucky]

17. FamDoc sez "Boobs sell and what sells is what's covered" --Is that a pun?

I mean, aren't sales better when the boobs are covered less?

[Simard]

4. change it

I don't think it has to be this way, however. Changes can be made.

[NaderIsMyHero]

7. Got news for ya....democracy is dead.

We are an oligarchy. The power is in the hands of a few. Americans are too lazy and apathetic to worry about politics. Thats the sad thing...we gave away our Democracy...nobody took it from us.

[tabasco]

8. Sounds like you surrendered already.

That's sad too.

[messiah]

9. True

[Simard]

12. RAGE

Do not go into that good night
rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas Dylan.

If you want democracy then change the apathy. Convince others to get involved. If you really believe in the cause people will listen.

[TXvote]

11. Democracy is messy

and we are shaking up the core of our parties and communities in a clamor to reclaim our path. It is actually a huge opportunity to redefine, energize, and mobilize the American people. I personally know hundreds (so there must be thousands) of everyday citizens that are motivated to participate at a new level because they feel so strongly about electing new leadership. BushCo. is very good at their divide, dismay, and defeat campaign and they would have us believing everybody loves their boy in the White House. I can tell you that democracy is alive and well in the US, but it's going to get messy here over the next few months and we will need your support. Don't believe the hype.

[Simard]

13. Sure but is it democracy

The problem is that democracy cannot exist if people do not know the choices they have. And I don't know how the average American can know what choices they have since the information they get is a distorition of fact; a cartoon caricature of the actuall standpoints of the candidates.

[Simard]

14. Get rid of Bush.

I do agree that Bush needs to go. The US and the world needs to get him out. But Does it need to occur at the expense of a clear political dialog. A dialog necessary for a true democracy. If it does then so be it. This is, however, a HUGE expense that is difficult to underestimate. Although, on the other hand, I do think four more years of Bush is worse.

[Simard]

15. The "define" speak

I would also like to ask what you mean by 'redefine'? This type of talk is exactly what I'm referring to. How is it possible to define a group of people as diverse as the US population? Kerry tries to "define" Bush, Bush tries to "Define" Kerry. Kerry, at least, is a complex human being with complex and sophisticated political positions. Bush tries to define this sophistication as "two faced" or "flip-flopping" I've even herd them call it "French" as if that has any relevance what so ever. Furthermore, Kerry is not innocent of these charges himself although he is much better then the Bushies.

[DeepModem Mom]

18. I just posted this in a GD@04 thread on the political spectrum

shifting to the right:

I think the acceptance of Reagan reset the political spectrum and I characterize Generation X as "Reagan babies" (with MANY exceptions, including all on this board in that age group), and that generation is the dominant professional age-group now. (I have hope for Gen Y.)

Then there was the successful demonization of the word "liberal," and the fostering of the idea that to be "conservative" meant to be a good, Godly citizen, with sound business principles, i.e., if you're not "conservative," you're pond-scum.

And the media -- don't get me started! Or -- I don't know where to start. I'll just give an example: when a person like Tom DeLay can occupy a high position in our government, without setting off a media firestorm as a person from outside the normal spectrum of American politics, we've got a problem. And you're right, when the country accepts Bush's extreme right-wing agenda, and considers actually electing him for the first time, then we have an even bigger problem.

(On edit: Welcome to DU, Simard!)

[FDRrocks]

19. It really is.

Both parties are corporate whores, and can easily be called despicable based on thier collective actions.

Although I would question if we were ever a Democracy.

[Solon]

20. We never have been a democracy.

“But we’re not a democracy. It’s a terrible misunderstanding and a slander to the idea of democracy to call us that. In reality, we’re a plutocracy: a government by the wealthy.”

— Ramsey Clark
former U.S. Attorney General
interview in The Sun magazine, August 2001

We have been a plutocracy since 1776. This "Great Experiment" has failed, we need to start again.

[jbutsz]

21. Yup

We fought against the King for independence but it didn't last long. Ever since the Revolution, the thieving class has been setting the stage for plutocracy - only this time, no answering to the King for anything.

They finally succeeded in seizing total power December 22-23, 1913 with the passage and signing of the Federal Reserve Act. Our government then ceased to be representative in any truthful sense. That we are a free country and people and live in a Democracy is a mass delusion instilled through social education.

We were sold out as slaves, and we've been chasing their carrot-on-a-stick "American Dream" ever since. We give them obedience and taxes in exchange for tyranny, wars-for-profit, and the illusion of control via political parties they effectively own.

We will never be free, and we will never have peace, and we will never have representative government, until we put in place an irreversible and impenetrable blockade on the ability of wealth to influence, seize, and control our governments.