|
|
#21
07-26-2007, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
What you seem to be advocating is something more akin to a direct democracy than a representative one. [/ QUOTE ] Precisely so. The evident failures for representative democracy are all around us. I am saying that representative democracy as practiced is severally non-democratic in nature, and that the notion of granting representatives power to vote whatever way they choose in the face of "changing circumstances" is obviously non-democratic. Circumstances change constantly! If representatives aren't obligated to do what they are mandated to do via elections, then two days after the election they can say "Whatever, circumstances changed. I'm voting for what me and my friends want, to hell with the voters." When the result of a process is that the laws enacted are supported by the minority only, that is a failure of democracy. It is not some version of democracy. [ QUOTE ] I don't know where you get the notion that once elected Congressmen in the U.S. are bound by what their constitutents tell them to do. [/ QUOTE ] I'm talking about what I think the role of representatives in a true democracy would be, not what Congressmen actually do or are legally required to do. [ QUOTE ] People elect representatives to make judgement calls on issues that may have not been contemplated at the time of the election. They are elected based on known information/beliefs with the hope that, based on their core beliefs, they will act in certain ways -- but there is no guarantee of that. [/ QUOTE ] There's not need to "hope" that elected reprentatives will do what they say they will. Democracy is not supposed to be a faith-based initiative. 
|
|
#22
07-26-2007, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
mosdef, then wouldn't the solution be for constituents to vote representatives who listened to groups like MADD out of office? I agree with you wrt to how things have actually played out in our society, but I find your argument pretty theoretically flimsy. Why exactly should MADD not try to convince legislators to join their side? If the legislator gets convinced by them and in the process abandons his mandate from the voters, he should supposedly be voted out of office.
|
|
#23
07-26-2007, 04:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
It can't be a failure of the system if the system was never designed to behave like a direct democracy. Our system was defined specifically to avoid the consequences of direct democracy.
[ QUOTE ] The evident failures for representative democracy are all around us [/ QUOTE ] And if a direct democracy were in place I can guarantee you would see the evident failures of that as well. There is no perfect system. I happen to think that a representative republic is a better system than a direct democracy on the whole, though each has good qualities and limitations.
|
|
#24
07-26-2007, 04:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
Democracy is not just a indiviudal voices trying to be heard. [ QUOTE ] Oh really? Why do we have a vote then? [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Apologies for the typos, perhaps they confused you. Or do I need to translate "just" into French for you?
|
|
#25
07-26-2007, 04:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
It can't be a failure of the system if the system was never designed to behave like a direct democracy. Our system was defined specifically to avoid the consequences of direct democracy. [/ QUOTE ] Fair enough, but that doesn't mean that design has been effective in guarding against the downside of direct democracy without introducing worse problems. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The evident failures for representative democracy are all around us [/ QUOTE ] And if a direct democracy were in place I can guarantee you would see the evident failures of that as well. There is no perfect system. [/ QUOTE ] Acknowledged, I just think that the "give representatives the power to do whatever they want after election" system is not as close to perfect as we can get. [ QUOTE ] I happen to think that a representative republic is a better system than a direct democracy on the whole, though each has good qualities and limitations. [/ QUOTE ] I agree, and think that the best approach is somewhere in between, where the limitations imposed on direct democracy are not obtained by granting indiscriminate authority to a minority which is counter to the philosophy of democracy in the first place.
|
|
#26
07-26-2007, 04:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Democracy is not just a indiviudal voices trying to be heard. [ QUOTE ] Oh really? Why do we have a vote then? [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Apologies for the typos, perhaps they confused you. Or do I need to translate "just" into French for you? [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you tell me what you think democracy is instead of making useless smarmy remarks. I am interested in what you think; I am not interested in your self-congratulatory smirky attitude.
|
|
#27
07-26-2007, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Democracy is not just a indiviudal voices trying to be heard. [ QUOTE ] Oh really? Why do we have a vote then? [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Apologies for the typos, perhaps they confused you. Or do I need to translate "just" into French for you? [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you tell me what you think democracy is instead of making useless smarmy remarks. I am interested in what you think; I am not interested in your self-congratulatory smirky attitude. [/ QUOTE ] Si vous étiez vraiment intéressé alors vous auriez lu mes poteaux précédents, depuis ce que vous demandez est déjà là. Trans: If you were truly interested then you would have read my previous posts, since what you are asking for is already there.
|
|
#29
07-26-2007, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
1. Settle down please 2. English only at the table. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] A tongue but no smile? You have to admit that was funny. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#30
07-26-2007, 11:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Becoming a Lobbyist
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] For practical purposes, it is impossible for any member of Congress to be "experts" on the various issues that come across their desks. We cannot expect them to write quality legislation on a topic that is, mostly, foreign to them. [/ QUOTE ] This is an argument against representative democracy, not an argument for lobbyists. [/ QUOTE ] Um, why not? We don't think badly of MADD lobbying for DUI legislation, isn't this a grass-roots effort? What's more, your comment seems to construe the aims of representative democracy and lobbyist as clearly opposing, exposing an anti-corporate bias, since I don't think you would have an objection to my previous example. A corporation has just as much a right to express its "views" as an individual. The aims of lobbyists can be aligned with or against the aims of representative democracy. There is no intrinsic "link" between the two, unless you want it so. [/ QUOTE ] FWIW, MADD is a TERRIBLE example. They are behometh money making, greed machine now. The lady who started it (with very good intentions I might add) is not speaking out against them for corrupting what she was trying to do. There is a really good article that Tuq posted on it, that I cant seem to find, pm him, if you want it (Ill try to find it also). The problem isnt lobbyists per se, it is the people running them.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
