Democracy is already dead.

[originalpckelly]

You can say anything you want. Walk any place you want. Protest anything you want. But how many people will listen to you? How much of an impact upon the policies of this nation will your comments have? Can you afford to buy a political ad?

The rich really do have more of an ability to exercise their free speech rights. If you literally look at the amount of money a person has, you can put it in the number of advertisements you can get on TV. For most of us, we alone cannot afford such advertisements, we must work together with like-minded people in groups. However, someone who has enough money to pay for the ad themselves, doesn't have that interpersonal barrier to expressing themselves. Even if you look at groups of people, it is highly unlikely that the total assets of the people in the group of like minded people will be bigger than many rich people. Even the group has problems expressing itself.

This is a fundamentally un-democratic idea, in a nation where most people learn of politicians not over the internet, but on their TV set.

You can have the opinions that you want, but you can't do a damn thing about getting them noticed. Sucks doesn't it? Bye democracy.

[originalpckelly]

1. I guess no one has anything to say about this?

:kick:

[DanCa]

2. Voting doesn't work for people like us.

Riots, on the other hand, do.

[Dhalgren]

4. Riots work. ANd we will be seeing a lot of rioting before all of

this is over. Riots, IEDs, snipers, car-bombs, ethnic cleansing - all of these things will be coming to an America near you....

[DanCa]

5. Freedom's on the march

But only if you can afford it.

[leeroysphitz]

44. Freedom is NOT free.

Actually, in this country it has gotten VERY expensive...

[datasuspect]

6. ah yes, nothing gets the landed gentry's attention

better than organized violent action on the part of the unwashed vulgar.

they like us better when we are in our respective places, dutifully going to work and paying off our debts to them.

[DanCa]

8. Violence worked for the religious right.

I miss the days when those nuts where on the fringes of society. I think the problem was when they started punching that we didn't hit back hard enough.

[datasuspect]

14. sometimes there just aren't enough crosses

they need a good beatdown.

[Burma Jones]

3. As long as the courts declare money to be speech, you're right

Sad to say, but Democracy is a commodity to be bought and sold.

[magellan]

10. When democracy becomes a commodity, it's no longer democracy

It's plutocracy or kleptocracy. Yes, democracy is all but dead in the US.

[originalpckelly]

7. The fact that we can still express ourselves is bad, not good.

We can air our frustrations with other people around us, but eventually they disappear into the memory hole. If we go up to someone on the street and talk to them about this it sounds like we are raving lunatics, whom believe in conspiracy theories. Mainly because we can still go out and talk if we want to.

If we didn't have the ability to get out of line and talk about things, it would be a more concrete sign to the public that something is wrong.

What I talked about in the OP is not democracy. That in combination with "conventionalism" breaks the effectiveness of dissent.

[Laotra]

23. I hear you

Democracy is not about freedom of expression, it's about right to be heard.

If we had right of initiative, with certain amount of signers, to be decided in referendum. Over constitutional matters and everything else, on local, national and global levels. Then we would be heard. Maybe a movement could be built arout the idea?

Of course, that would be only beginning, we need also to learn to listen each others, as human beings.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Oligarchy Inc. aka "Vital National Interests" Corp.

NOUN:
pl. ol·i·gar·chies

1.
1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
2. Those making up such a government.
2. A state governed by a few persons.

[Stevepol]

11. This has always been true and always will be true. The REAL

problem is the loss of the franchise, the fact that even though a sizable number of people DO HEAR YOU AND UNDERSTAND, their vote doesn't count or isn't counted (electronic voting machines) and therefore it seems that your message hasn't gotten through.

It has.

The problem is the franchise. We need to have a democracy again.

[bryant69]

12. Yeah but the wealthy have had that power pretty much forever

If this kills Democracy, have we had Democracy ever? Really?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. Short answer. No.

[bryant69]

15. Interesting.

Not sure I find that "short answer" entirely convincing, but I respect it's brevity.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dhalgren]

19. I tend to believe Gore Vidal in his various histories. The US has

always been controlled by a few families, but most of the members of these families understood the "golden goose" nature of their enterprise. They were men and women of high learning (for the most part) and had a grasp of what the Constitution and the Foundation was all about. So, as long as that was the case, the "democracy" could function as it was designed - to control the masses, ensure "good" lives for the citizenry, and massive wealth for the "families". What has happened over the past six or seven years (actually, perhaps, the last twenty years) is that the Rabid Right has killed the goose and all that is left is a shabby fascism...

[Laotra]

24. Progressive

I guess the word progressive means belief in evolution towards higher, more and more inclusive and participatory forms of democracy, even if the progress feels aften painfully slow and passes some generations all together, taking steps back and occational leap ahead, or perhaps also vice versa. Some call next democratic evolutionary step or leap ahead socialism - some call it Switzerland :) - but labels are not important, progressivism means also attempt to see behind labels.

[marions ghost]

20. maybe we need to figure out how

to bring democracy to America. I agree, we've only had an illusion of democracy in the last several decades. The system as it exists in America is dysfunctional.

It's just become too easy for relatively small groups to control the economic picture, control the money and resources, control the media, control access to government and the judicial system, control information, control the election system, etc.etc. What the Boosh era has proven beyond all doubt is that, given enough legal and illegal loopholes, most power-hungry and greedy individuals WILL abuse the system and seek to run roughshod over others. Nothing prevents them, certainly not "religion," not "laws," not "public opinion"--NOTHING prevents them from exploiting others just as far as they can. We have bred a species of leaders with no conscience.

We are going to have to create a new form of democracy which does NOT rely on something as naive as "trust." We don't have any other choice. Do not despair. This is just a dying of the old, an exposure of what is not working, a national mental breakdown. This makes people who are paying attention feel very uncertain, fearful, nervous--which is appropriate IMO, because it will get worse before it gets better. But on the plus side, many more people are FEELING this, are aware of what's happening, are unhappy with it. This is our power. We have the numbers.

Collapse is a necessary phase before the hard work of reconfiguring begins. Just like a mental collapse for an individual, it will be a difficult time. But in difficult times, there is always opportunity. The challenge of healing, repairing, reconstructing is a challenge we must face. We really have no choice but to resist being pawns in the sham democracy that now exists in the United States. The WORST part psychologically is having to face the lie of it--that we are schooled to believe we live in such a a great democracy, when nothing could be further from the truth at this point. That disconnect is hitting more and more people. It's the lie of it that really hurts. And after the hurt should come a healthy anger. Not only do we need the will to fight against oppression, but we need the long-range vision to create a system of government that works for us in its place.

[sweetheart]

16. "effective plutocracy"

It is a new constitution, with 1 vote per dollar and 1 right, the right to consume.

When did we change over?

[ChicagoRonin]

17. Change waiting for critical mass

I do not believe democracy is completely dead, though, as some have stated, we've never had a full democracy from the beginnings of this nation (the Electoral college, slavery, mistreatment of Native Americans and denial of votes to women being some of the misteps). However, for those who keep wondering "What will it take" with regards to the country finally fighting back against the forces of neoconservatism, corporatism and all those other ills: If history is any guide, it won't be until a majority of people feel the full consequences of the ill-conceived policies of those currently in power. In particular, I think change won't really happen until the majority of the middle class (or those who still believe they are middle class) finally realize that they are poor - economically, socially, professionally, maybe even spiritually. We still have too many creature comforts, ranging from internet access to movies, cable TV and videogames and trendy dining out, that allow middle class voters to imagine that times are good; and on top of that, we have too much easy credit that let's them cruise by even when they have no actual monetary wealth. But it's an unsustainable system, and WILL eventually break down. And sad to say, those in power aren't going to do jack until they realize that an angry mob is at the doorstep. Remember, it took the Haymarket Riots to give the US the 8-hour workday, the French aristocracy found themselves beheaded before they realized that raping the public wasn't a good idea, and ditto in principal for the Russian aristocracy. Action doesn't necessarily have to take the form of violence: remember, there's still the example of the 60s antiwar movement, the Civil Rights Movement, and not to mention Gandhi's nonviolent measures against British Colonialism in India.

[originalpckelly]

18. I have seen many people say that democracy may...

never have existed by these standards. To some extent since the creation of America more wealth meant more free speech. Wealth is a form of power. As long as wealth is collected in the hands of a few, it is a form of tyranny. Now, it is not absolute tyranny, but it is a tyranny.

When I talk about wealth distribution I must make something widely known, I do not support communism nor do I support socialism. I don't like state owned companies, because I believe that is a form of centralizing power. I also don't like company owned states, because that too is a form of centralized power.

When I talk about a democratic wealth distribution, I mean to speak of entrepreneurs. People who own their own business. Control their own destiny.

In America, for many years, the majority of people worked for themselves primarily as farmers. It was true during the times before the 20th century that people did also work in trades, but these people were specialists who still in many cases worked for themselves.

Then came the "robber barons" and that was the first wealth redistribution to the select few. Ever since then this country has been careening towards a company owned state. The only force opposing that in the previous century was socialism and communism.

But as I mentioned before they aren't much better. When people saw the Soviet Union collapse, there became fewer believers in communism and socialism because they saw that communism and socialism failed. This eliminated the force that balanced the "corporatocracy" in our country.

Yes, as some at this board may attest, there are still people who believe in this, but while they have the best intentions (something that cannot be said of the corporatocracy) they believe in an ideology that will lead us down a path to tyranny.

We need small businesses. We need more coops, companies owned by the people who work for them and use them. I think that is actually the best hope for America, because it is the most democratic and free of all types of companies.

The people should own the companies, but not all the people should own all the companies. Doing that effectively eliminates competition, which is something that increases efficiency and sparks creativity (I mean honest competition, not the sick and twisted vision forwarded by the corporatocrats.) It is the best of communism and the best of capitalism. The state is still separate from the company; and that prevents centralization of power.

[marions ghost]

22. re competition

how do you balance it with sharing and cooperation? The two are such opposites.

[originalpckelly]

33. Are you kidding me?

If we encourage small companies to cooperate with each other that would be what I am talking about. We could encourage partnerships of something like 10-20 people. That way the wealth would be distributed to the middle class, but because there isn't only one big state owned company, there would be competition. We could create non-profit cooperatives for essential services like health care, food, and energy. The only people who would be making money in those companies would be the people who are actually helping others (you know, the way it should be.)

I think I have stumbled on to a new type of economic system.

Democratic Capitalism.

[Laotra]

25. In my definition

belief in state owned companies is not socialism or communism, it is state capitalism and in the worst cases, stalinism on the other hand and corporate owned states on the other.

Difference between Libertarian and Marxist tendencies is that the latter think that states cannot be dispelled without taking power over them, which given some common traits in human nature easily leads to stalinistic authoritarianism, while the first can be criticized that states don't go away just by ignoring them. This is not an easy dilemma to solve, but not impossible - mistakes can be learned from. I think the next unificatory attempt - judging by discussions in World Social Forums for example - to solve that dilemma is a creative many-faced process without a strict plan, starting from building direct and participatory forms of democracy from local to global level, to see how it goes from there.

Also some old and tried ideas still work, to some extent at least, like cooperatives, which you mention.

[originalpckelly]

21. Looks like this thread is already dead.

:kick:

[Laotra]

26. Don't give up too early!

Kick and recommend

[deaniac21]

27. Here is what this thread needs...

[Odin2005]

28. The US has never been a democracy.

The US is, and always has been, a Capitalist Plutocracy. Capitalism and Democracy are mutually exclusive because the elites will always try to protect thier wealth from the masses. As long as the source of capital is private investors instead of the people as a whole we will never be truely democratic.

[originalpckelly]

30. I think you are wrong...capitalism is right, just not this form of it...

I think people should be able to get rich, just not billionaire rich. Millionaire rich is alright. Think about it, a person with a billion could give it to 1,000 people and they would be millionaires.

That whole rich people thing actually does have some value, just not like it is now.

[Odin2005]

38. I'm not against people becoming rich per se...

I'm against getting rich from sources that are the result of other people's work, like stocks. If you want to become rich you should get the money FROM YOUR OWN LABOR. Corporate profit is theft of the fruit of other people's hard work.

[tjwash]

29. You're just now noticing this?

We were founded by a bunch of rich, white, slave owning Euro's who left Britain because they hated to pay their taxes.

My how things have changed huh?

That's why we keep plugging away a little at a time...

[Odin2005]

39. Ironically the taxes they didn't want to pay were for war debts.

Sounds like Bush giving tax cuts to the rich while piling of the deficits with war spending.

[cantstandbush]

31. Money=power=more money=more power = ....nt

[Xenotime]

32. Why? If 80% of the people disapprove of this administration...

Why are they still in power? Why hasn't anything been done? Are they really that powerful? If so, who gives them that power?

[newspeak]

34. there is nothing wrong with forming cooperatives

with the board of said cooperatives being comprised by the people within the cooperative. I remember about twenty years ago ambulance companies couldn't get insurance (I believe it was in New York), they formed a cooperative providing themselves with insurance. My favorite small health food store is a cooperative. Family farms form co-ops. Maybe, I'm too much of an idealist--but a response to these greedy corporations (not all corporations do harm), is a coming together of the people to form their own affordable services--to walk away from big business--afterall, they have already abandoned us, the consumer. When we have the "honor" of bagging and scanning our own groceries--when there is less customer service and higher costs so that the corporation, the CEO and their shareholders can make even a bigger profit at our expense, then maybe it's time to think outside of the box.

[newspeak]

35. I'd say this country is going towards a theocratic plutocracy

I remember my political science professor asking which is better a benevolent dictatorship or a tyrannical democracy? When the majority of the people dictate to the minority without safeguards for the minority (like a constitution, a Bill of Rights), then the will of the majority may be tyrannical. For instance, if the majority will benefit from slavery, thus enslaving the minority, then said democracy breeds tyranny. This administration spouts thrusting democracy at other countries, but those who hold the majority could exterminate the minority without some form of writ to the contrary. Of course when the minority is in power (like big business) dictating laws and reforms through the government against the will of the people--it's fascism. I'm saying the minority because it is a few corporations that wield power through our government-that wield more power than all of the citizens of this country!!! And, believe me, they are not American-they are multi-national corporations that only serve themselves. So, how do the people wrest back some power from the corporations? To me, take away some of their business by forming cooperatives and become community and politically active. If we have to form citizens groups to form "truth" seeking newspapers and networks, then with a concerted effort, it can happen. It's up to the people to do so!!! I would be willing to donate money for alternative source of media--especially a new network. Since PBS has recently been influenced by this administration and government funds may disappear, something must take it's place or it could survive by a cooperative of and by the people, as it was meant to be. I'm interested in hearing other suggestions, because giving up is not an option.

[marions ghost]

37. support alternative media

the only way to go now. I like putting the emphasis on the positive--"truth seeking" media rather than "alternative" media. Alternative has come to mean "fringe" element. Forget that--we are no longer fringe, if we ever were--not after this Iraq disaster. Everyone knows how complicit the MSM was in blatantly promoting the biggest lie in US history.

A dynamic new independent network would be so successful it would leave the others in the dust.

[Odin2005]

40. Tyranny by Majority doesn't last long. It will either cause civil war...

... or will end in a coup by a populist dictator.

[Odin2005]

42. The system is rigged by the corporastists against co-ops.

The corporate elite fear co-ops because they offer a plausable democratic socialist alternative to corporate capitalism. Some co-ops can become very powerfull and successful; the Mondragon co-op, a major Spanish manufacturing and retail company owned collectively by several Basque communities in NE Spain, is a good example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondrag%C3%B3n_Cooperative_Corporation

[blues90]

36. I would be hauled away

If I went into any place in Hollywood were i live and began ranting people would ignore me as much as a homeless person in rags and I would be tossed out or taken away . I have not a dime to donate and there are many great causes i would if I could . I am not far from the streets with the money I have and bills to pay . I have this , I have the thought if all else fails and the bills can't be paid , my wife and I have maybe just enough money held to drive to New Orleans and join Habitate for america and help rebuild and hope we would have a roof and food to survive on while at least doing something worthwhile and good before we die , we are both near 60 so really the way things are now we don't have much to loose , we own no property we have nothing and we certainly don't have alot of time left and the world we knew is gone .

[Initech]

41. Exactly why I hate television.

I cant watch more than five minutes of any given channel without thinking - "This is it. Hundreds of thousands of years of civilization, many of which have come and gone, so we can stare at a box to watch a bunch of overpaid idiots."

[B3Nut]

43. "Television, the drug of the nation

breeding ignorance and feeding radiation"

-Disposable Hereoes of Hiphoprisy

Great track, IIRC out of print but you can find it on www.turnoffyourtv.com

Todd in Beerbratistan