Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: And you thought this was democracy ?

Posted 7 years ago on July 3, 2012, 3:58 p.m. EST by commonsensefiles (4)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

DECISIONS ABOUT AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TAKEN WITHOUT AMERICAN PEOPLE


Despite the fact most Americans believe present day politics border on the ridiculous, not to mention moral and ethical standards, nobody really knows what to do about it.

If we ever expect to at least partially restore the public trust in the government and the political parties we need to begin from the bottom up. The manner in which our modern society is currently structured (and manipulated) is unfortunately too far gone, so we as individuals need to peacefully, perhaps slowly, but decisively do something meaningful about this situation. As many other issues, the sacred principle of democracy, The Majority Rules, had been turned into a myth.

The whispering, the protests, the endless e-mails, the marches, the occasional rational statements, and even some public events (frequently initially organized in good faith but later turned into sinister hidden agendas) only act as appeasements, as safety valves for public anger at being so shamelessly exploited. They turn out not only as a waste of time (and money), but as a hypocritical feeling of “something” being done against the constraining policies. Sadly enough, same applies to comments on the Internet. Nothing is achieved. All we really do is talk.

By now it must be obvious to that great majority of American people that whatever it is we have done so far did not and does not work. We need to return to the point where it all started falling apart. Violence of any kind is decidedly not a solution. It would only complicate the already tense situation. We see tragic examples of failure in that sense on our TV sets every day from other parts of the world.

* Today’s democracy is a far cry from the initially formulated historical concept. We all do not want to hear it, much less admit it, but we instinctively know it is so. We have conveniently forgotten the basic principle. A genuine vote for the best candidate for the benefit of the country has been replaced long ago. Instead, we are now being graciously told we have a choice between two self-appointed and self-proclaimed candidates who talk about imaginary and unrealistic promises to shamelessly ignore them later. And the American people know this by now, yet they obediently comply.

There are several extremely clear and effective steps of how to bring up to the surface the obvious disagreement of the vast majority of the population and regain rational control of the country.

The first one is a compulsory vote.

In order to recapture a degree of national respect and avert the ever-growing plague of escalating universal depression, we need to stop talking and start doing. Why not begin with overhauling “the”, one, single, principal concept of democracy. Government by the people for the people, attained by the involvement of each and every citizen.

I am not sure why, but this may be hard to swallow for some. Unless we want our children and grandchildren to become remotely operated disposable units of profit-oriented global powers, and we are well on the way, a modern version of past domination schemes in world’s history, we have to make a stand and do something constructive.

The following numbers are a rough example of what I mean. They do not pretend to reflect precise records. What matters is they reflect the overall concept, the Common Sense view of what must be accomplished before anything at all may be really changed on the national political scene.

Today’s population of the United States of America is approximately 313 million souls. Out of those, discounting illegal immigrants and legal residents, about 286 million are American Citizens. Out of those, about 232 million are the voting age population.

In past national elections, voting records indicate approximately 132 million have actually voted. Let’s skip exact figures again and state that the winning party won its “democratic” right to govern with an alleged majority, which instead of at least the 51% of the population in reality turned out to be about 29% of the U.S. voting population.

By this process, only about 66 million people have therefore amazingly decided the political, social, and economical future of the 313,000,000 inhabitants. That ultimately translates at approximately 21% - TWENTY ONE PERCENT ! - of the entire population of the USA chose the political profile for nearly EIGHTY PERCENT of the country to follow.

And nobody says a word.

Can anybody, even the so-eloquent politicians, seriously maintain that decisions of TWENTY ONE PERCENT of the population are a valid interpretation of the essence of a governing majority ?

To achieve this astonishing recovery of the authentic democratic principle, I propose we amend our civic rights and obligations and institute a compulsory vote.

Simple as that. If this concept shocks you, think about it. My first question to you would be why? It is the simplest and strangely enough the peaceful solution for what ails us. We have many rules and regulations for our society to function in an orderly manner. We accept them as for what they are. Not limiting impositions, but reasonable operational rules. If you are a member of a club, a group, an organization, isn’t it not only logical but especially rational that YOU, under the basic DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES, give YOUR opinion about the actions or inactions of that organization ? Isn’t that the core of democratic government ? That we all have a voice ? It should be simultaneously a privilege and a civic obligation to participate in the decisions of your country’s future. Why should, or for that matter, would you abstain from this privilege ?

We drive on the right side of the road. Doesn’t that mean while you do have the liberty to drive on the left or in the middle, but since it would certainly lead to a guaranteed cause of endless accidents, that such simple and civilized “agreement” is reasonable ?

Our air traffic is controlled by trained people who instruct the aircraft crews which course and at what height should they fly to be safe. Doesn’t that mean while the aircraft pilot has the liberty to fly wherever s/he wants to, that it only is reasonable to come to a universal “agreement” to avoid a guaranteed cause of endless disasters ?

A mandatory vote achieves the true miracle. It converts the idealistic concept of democracy into effective reality. One hundred percent of American citizens should be the ones who decide the future of the United States of America. Certainly not a bunch of politicians juggling at ridiculous expense the manipulation of the opinion of TWENTY ONE PERCENT of the people.

I anticipate passionate arguments of individuals and groups of all kinds, something that never fails, especially from those whose schemes will crumble under such revelation. They will be the first loudly demanding the alleged liberty not to vote. Yet the simple existence of a blank vote ballot will not only insure that particular freedom of expression of personal disagreement, but what is of paramount importance, it will finally and indisputably demonstrate the authentic extent of that shrouded national disagreement with the heading our political system is taking. The overall count will finally unveil the true majority’s opinion. It will consequently indicate the American people’s authentic will without any tampering.

Thus the compulsory vote, as many other rules and obligations we share as citizens, will not detract from individual freedoms, but simply be one of the judicious conditions of belonging to this nation. Of being an active and above all concerned U.S. citizen, not an apathetic dormant mummy. It will not necessarily solve the problems we are facing, but it will decidedly stir the perception of the people’s power.

I realize what I am proposing here is a major issue, a supreme inconvenience for the unscrupulous politicians, who will not accept it kindly. But it will do away with uncertainty and so many deceitful words. It will defuse the constantly growing animosity and dangerous tensions. Because we will know exactly where we stand. Perhaps, just perhaps one or several of the philanthropists who have publicly declared sincere interest in the future of our country, such as Warren Buffett or Bill Gates or, who knows, maybe even some honest politicians, or high government officials, and perhaps even a few of the honorable members of the Congress will recognize this strange yet simple solution as a viable proposition. They may realize and admit this is a sensible way of how to commence fixing the current inoperative status quo. Ultimately, such non-discriminatory interest will help us to plan and to execute an appropriate instrument that will cause this important transformation in amending the American way of interpreting democracy.

That is, if we really want to stop listening to the current political garbage, stop talking, and find the time and dedication to concretely begin solving the present political dilemma.

July 2012

20 Comments

20 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

Election Turnout average in national lower house elections, 1960–1995

Country . . Mandatory(Y/N) . . Number of elections . . % turnout average

Austria . . N . . 9 . . 92%

Belgium . . Y . . 12 . . 91%

Italy . . Y (not enforced) . . 9 . . 90%

Iceland . . N . . 10 . . 89%

New Zealand . . N . . 12 . . 88%

Denmark . . N . . 14 . . 87%

Germany . . N . . 9 . . 86%

Sweden . . N . . 14 . . 86%

Greece . . Y (not enforced) . . 10 . . 86%

Argentina . . Y . . 12 . . 83%

Norway . . N . . 9 . . 81%

Australia . . Y . . 14 . . 81%

Israel . . N . . 9 . . 80%

Portugal . . N . . 9 . . 79%

Finland . . N . . 10 . . 78%

France . . N . . 9 . . 76%

United Kingdom . . N . . 9 . . 76%

South Korea . . N . . 11 . . 75%

Ireland . . N . . 11 . . 74%

Canada . . N . . 12 . . 74%

Spain . . N . . 6 . . 73%

Japan . . N . . 12 . . 71%

India . . N . . 6 . . 58%

Switzerland . . N . . 8 . . 54%

United States . . N . . 18 . . 48%*

*Turnout rates during the period ranged from 55% for general election years, to 40% to off-year elections (those for which the presidency was not on the ballot).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 7 years ago

So you want to have the government mandate something else. Force us to do something. This country was founded on liberty not dictating what people must do. Better to educate your family, friends, neighbors and communities so they actually choose to vote and then they vote informed rather than blindly and stupidly. The problem has been that up until now, nobody was paying attention. As more and more pay attention and wake up to what is happening to the country, they will exercise their right to vote.

What people seem to ignore is that elections aren't just national. As important as national elections are, you make more of a difference locally and at the state level. Those are what really impact you and your community. If people take notice to that and vote in every election, they can make change happen on every level. Congressional elections are also very important, even more important than the Presidential. The congress enacts law. It is easier to impact those elections than the Presidential. Congressional leaders need to be replaced often so the corruption of Washington doesn't have the time to corrupt them. Vote out incumbents and vote in citizens. These are the elections that really count.

[-] 1 points by commonsensefiles (4) 7 years ago

I don't think you read the article. We are NOT talking about a mandate, we are talking about bringing up to the surface the real opinion of the nation, not just of a 21% of it. Please explain how else may we obtain clarity in the opinion of the entire country.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 7 years ago

I think the real opinion of the nation is that we have crooks for leaders who have been bought by Wall Street and lobbyists. OWS, the Tea Party and everyone in between agrees with that. Voting is how we fix it by getting rid of all the crooks running things but forcing people to vote is not the answer. Educating our friends, neighbors and communities is the answer.

"A mandatory vote achieves the true miracle." These are your words. Whether you phrase it as mandatory or compulsory voting, you are still describing a mandate. It IS forcing people to do something. LeoYo is correct that freedom of speech also guarantees freedom to be silent. Just because 21% (or 48% or whatever it is today) of the people take part in our election process, doesn't mean we need to make yet another law or take away yet another liberty. Why do people have this idea that if people are ignorant or apathetic or don't do something that others feel they should do, than let's create a new law and make them do it...whether it's being able to buy a 32 oz drink in NY or voting. Why do so many feel that the government needs be our daddy and control every aspect of our lives. Or that the government should force people to do something because they are irresponsible and don't do it on their own.

One of the points in your article is incorrect. We are NOT a democracy. We are a republic. We do not rule by majority. We rule by majority representation which is why congressional leaders are so much more important that presidential leaders. And congressional leaders are much easier to elect but not many people understand that. Only people in the state and congressional districts are voting in each of those elections. Your vote is much more important.

Most people don't even realize that voting isn't every 4 years. It happens every year with local, state and congressional elections. If people want to make a change, then they need to get up off their ass and vote freely and in every election and of their own free will. And they need to educate themselves on the issues not just nationally but also locally and state-wide. And they need to find out the truth of every issue and get off the ridiculous talking points spouted everywhere on all sides. They need to become involved but we can't force them. This is still a free country. You are free to be ignorant, irresponsible, and apathetic.

As I said before, the problem has been that for years few have been paying attention and the crooks took over. Now all of a sudden, people are paying attention which is great but rather than fixing things thru education and involvement in the system, many want to completely transform our system into something else with more government control. With crooks in charge, why would we want that? We have a unique system that has allowed more freedom than any other country on earth. The system itself is not at fault, it is the lack of involvement by it's people that has resulted in the mess we face today but the solution is not to deny a freedom by forcing you to vote but to educate people to want to vote and not just on a president who has little power but on the real leadership that runs this country - the crooks in congress. Let's get rid of them and get in real citizens who can make the changes we need happen.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

less than half the population voted

in congress, at least half must be present to vote

[-] -1 points by DKAtaday (-4) from Brooklyn Park, MN 7 years ago

over 90 percent of all people who wear shoes have feet

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Get your own identity: [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 4 minutes ago

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

when more than 50% of the congress present, that amount is called a quorum

the San Diego GA calls 20 people a quorum

.

if voting is to be mandatory,

demand elections be national and state holidays

[-] -2 points by DKAtaday (-4) from Brooklyn Park, MN 7 years ago

when more than 50% of the congress present, that amount is called a quorum

the San Diego GA calls 20 people a quorum

.

if voting is to be mandatory,

demand elections be national and state holidays

strawberries, blueberries and cherries are better for you than eating rocks

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

thanks

the traffic analogy is unclear

the first section is great, and I am retweeting what I like

[-] -2 points by DKAtaday (-4) from Brooklyn Park, MN 7 years ago

some say the best way to measure the insanity is to count the nuts

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Get your own identity: [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 4 minutes ago

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 years ago

gathering is a method of survival

[-] -2 points by DKAtaday (-4) from Brooklyn Park, MN 7 years ago

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (9451) 31 minutes ago

less than half the population voted

in congress, at least half must be present to vote ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 28 minutes ago

over 90 percent of all people who wear shoes have feet ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink [-] 0 points by MattLHolck (9451) 21 minutes ago

when more than 50% of the congress present, that amount is called a quorum

the San Diego GA calls 20 people a quorum

.

if voting is to be mandatory,

demand elections be national and state holidays ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 17 minutes ago

when more than 50% of the congress present, that amount is called a quorum

the San Diego GA calls 20 people a quorum

.

if voting is to be mandatory,

demand elections be national and state holidays

strawberries, blueberries and cherries are better for you than eating rocks ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink [-] 1 points by MattLHolck (9451) 15 minutes ago

thanks

the traffic analogy is unclear

the first section is great, and I am retweeting what I like ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 12 minutes ago

some say the best way to measure the insanity is to count the nuts ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink [-] 1 points by MattLHolck (9451) 0 minutes ago

gathering is a method of survival ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Get your own identity: [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 4 minutes ago

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Get your own identity: [-] 1 points by DKAtaday (0) from Brooklyn Park, MN 4 minutes ago

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 7 years ago

Denying Americans their 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech by forcing them to speak through voting is never going to happen nor would it make anything better. A lack of voting has never been the problem http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/ and therefore is not the solution http://occupywallst.org/forum/political-organization-rather-than-political-party/ .

[-] 1 points by commonsensefiles (4) 7 years ago

I wonder if your opinion is intentionally misleading or if you did not read the entire article. For a "freedom of speech", there MUST BE a speech. If we remain silent (because we are busy). How would you know about the lack of voting if we have NEVER experienced it ? There are countries where voting IS mandatory. This does not mean it's better or worse, but simply the entire nation pools its opinion.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 7 years ago

For freedom of speech, there must be freedom, i.e. a choice of whether or not to speak. People, as guaranteed by their 1st Amendment rights, have the freedom to remain silent, be it under arrest or in voting. No one can be compelled to go out of their way against their own will to put forth an opinion demanded by others. All governments persist by the consent of the governed and that includes those who consent by a free choice of silence.

Did you read the links I provided? Did you see how the system was designed so that no amount of voting by itself can ever change anything? Did you see the solution in only voting for signers of affidavits that legally hold the signers accountable to the voters?

It doesn't matter if you have 20% of the people voting for unaccountable candidates or 100% of the people voting for unaccountable candidates, the results are all the same. Unaccountable public officials render all votes meaningless. The solution is in accountability, not in increasing votes for the unaccountable.