So my theory is that we do count on our democracies, but we don't necessarily trust them all that much, especially when a dictator like George Bush starts ransacking the Constitution
Trust me, this is not at all a whacked out theory, and the thing is, though? The model America works on is actual a republican-democractic mashup, which is why we're actually DOING IT WRONG when we tell people to become democractic. We're not precisely democractic either.
George Bush was not democractically elected AT ALL. He was elected on a republican model (lower case, meaning the system not the political party). The majority of Americans physically wanted the other guy in office (both times IIRC) - but we have this little thing called the electoral college.
But in America, I think what makes democracy so uncomfortable for some people, at least on a subconscious level, is the thought that in a democracy the majority basically rules. Which means you're okay so long as you and yours are in the majority. But in a population like America that has such a dynamic population, especially a population who's demographics and values are in such obvious flux, the idea of a majority ruling is scary - especially when those who previously have been the unofficial ruling class stand to be ousted from power.
It's also scary when you have to worry about how to keep the majority in your favor. True democracy and true anarchy are scarily close to each other.
Or: You don't VOTE for kings!. I feel like I should be harvesting mud in a Monty Python movie somewhere.
And? Democracy works at, like, the speed of molasses running uphill as far as getting things done. Seriously. If you have a democracy and glacier on the same road? The glacier will pass the democracy on the right, honk it's horn, flip it the finger, and tell it to "get off the road, grandma!"
is to comfort, and one comforting thing is that we can trust the guy in charge.
[Insert joke about how trusting a politician really IS a fantasy]. I'd make one, but I'm not that witty. ;)
no subject
Trust me, this is not at all a whacked out theory, and the thing is, though? The model America works on is actual a republican-democractic mashup, which is why we're actually DOING IT WRONG when we tell people to become democractic. We're not precisely democractic either.
George Bush was not democractically elected AT ALL. He was elected on a republican model (lower case, meaning the system not the political party). The majority of Americans physically wanted the other guy in office (both times IIRC) - but we have this little thing called the electoral college.
But in America, I think what makes democracy so uncomfortable for some people, at least on a subconscious level, is the thought that in a democracy the majority basically rules. Which means you're okay so long as you and yours are in the majority. But in a population like America that has such a dynamic population, especially a population who's demographics and values are in such obvious flux, the idea of a majority ruling is scary - especially when those who previously have been the unofficial ruling class stand to be ousted from power.
It's also scary when you have to worry about how to keep the majority in your favor. True democracy and true anarchy are scarily close to each other.
Or: You don't VOTE for kings!. I feel like I should be harvesting mud in a Monty Python movie somewhere.
And? Democracy works at, like, the speed of molasses running uphill as far as getting things done. Seriously. If you have a democracy and glacier on the same road? The glacier will pass the democracy on the right, honk it's horn, flip it the finger, and tell it to "get off the road, grandma!"
is to comfort, and one comforting thing is that we can trust the guy in charge.
[Insert joke about how trusting a politician really IS a fantasy]. I'd make one, but I'm not that witty. ;)
Seriously, though, you make good sense.