Notices
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: A question about Democracy....

  1. #1 A question about Democracy.... 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    I am currently studying the idea of Democracy and what exactly it means and how it could be implemented.

    I am just beginning to analyse political laws and regularities so here's my question.

    As i understand it here in the west where we supposedly practice Democracy it is customary to elect our Government leaders every 4-5 years.
    This leaders are delegates voted in by the majority who believe that these people are the best available for the job.

    Now if say these delegates after a year were discovered not to be up to scratch and the majority were unhappy with the way they were running the show. Is it possible for the people to take back the powers and re-employ other delegates that were deemed more suitable? And is it possible to do this before the term of office is up?

    Or otherwise are we stuck with leaders we might consider to be useless until a next election is called?

    I'd be glad for any answers you might know or any links, direction and information you could give me to further my research.

    I don't want to know what you think should happen (that's possibly for another debate) I would like to know what the regulations are governing the above scenarios and possibilities.

    Many thanks


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Here in the USA, a federal official can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. Some states provide for recall elections of state and local officials. It doesn't happen very often though. You can't be having elections constantly.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    The United Kingdom has an unwritten constitution. Many of us consider this a great strength. The constitution instead is invested in a variety of laws and perhaps more importantly, practices that have evolved since at least the Magna Carta.

    Elections of Members of Parliament can occur at any time within five years (and, I think, some days) of the last election. The Prime Minister is not voted for directly, but is the leader of the party which gains control of the House of Commons.
    If there were to be near universal dissaitsfaction with a government then the combined swell of public opinion and media derision would, I beleive, lead to the fall of that government. If it did not do the honourable thing and call a general election, then it would succumb to a revolt by enough of its back benchers to bring it down in a vote of no confidence.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    The people that wrote the US Constitution, were very concerned about the fitness of officials sent by the public to represent their states. They inserted a clause, where by any person found to be Mentally or Physically impaired could be expelled, which has nothing to do with impeachment for criminal activity.

    For instance, the President/VP can be expelled, if 3/4 of his Cabinet feel either is in some manner unfit to serve. They can submit such a proposal to Congress, which must act on that proposal. There is a means for Congress and the Supreme Court, as well. However the process has rarely been used and many members of Congress or the Supreme Court are wheel chaired to vote or make decision, unaware of what they are voting on or decisions being made...The rule *must be present* was to prevent this...

    There is also a progression to office, which has been used many times, which does NOT require an election. The VP to P or the House Leader to
    VP and in many cases the ruling Governor of a State picks a replacement of a House Member or Senator. Justices are simple replaced by the normal process, since lifetime appointments...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Thank you everyone who's written on this thread.

    The informatin you have given is very useful.

    I am looking into what you have told me further.

    US policies seem alot different to UK.

    At present i am looking at UK but then i want to go on to the US and compare.

    I am particularly interested in looking at what Democracy purports to be and how it is implemented in reality.

    What it claims to be and what it actually is, seem to be different things at present :?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Selene

    To answer your question, I think you should be informed that my latest dictionary defines 'democracy' and 'republic' differently.

    Democracy is from the Greek root "people power".

    Republic is from the Latin root "WEALTH + public".

    These definitions account for the differences in our two political parties.

    The democrats representing the citizens of our country while the republicans represent the wealthy people plus the religion of the Latin church.

    The sad thing here is that the democrats are in a confused state of loyalties, to our Constitutional mandate of serving all the people, not just 'one' issue or individuals.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •