Power to the People?

[cavalier]

Based on a question I saw somewhere else, should everybody be able to directly influence their country's constitution?

This question is very much hypothetical, so please try to disregard any impracticalites.

[17th Angel]

I'll say it again.... :/

"People shouldn't fear their goverment, the goverment should fear it's people." -V

[wil]

I registered an overall no.

I cannot speak for the rest of the world but in the US, the general population does not have the interest or the education in order to make valid decisions on issues.

I am not in favor of Democracy (mobocracy) as giving the final vote to the general public virtually will always eliminate or bankrupt any gov't over time.

In the US such things as the abolishment of slavery, giving women the right to vote, civil rights, the American Disabilities Act....and on and on...would not have occurred if popular vote would have determined the fate of these bills/constitutional amendments.

We are not even doing well at the ability to vote conscious intelligent people into office. Our constitution required we elect representative and Senators were appointed we should return to that so as to loosen the grip of the voter...to offset that loss we should also return to Vice Presidents being the person who comes in second in the electoral college...returning that power to the voter...

[Snoopy]

minor point: the UK doesn't HAVE a written constitution...

s.

[KarimK]

I voted "undecided" although I'm sort of leaning towards an overall "no". Basically for the same reasons Wil evoked... Most people express absolutely no interest in politics and votes following its own prejudices and preconceived ideas.
But then this raises the problem of democracy : if everyone isn't fit to vote and have a say, how are we to decide whose voice is valid and whose isn't? This is going back to a certain elitist and undemocratic concept of power, I guess.
Are things like education, "intelligence", really good criteria to decide who can have a say and who can't?
And, most importantly, should the fact that we're bound to make mistakes keep us from having our say?

huuuu, the UK doesn't have a WRITTEN constitution? :O

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by 17th Angel

I'll say it again.... :/

"People shouldn't fear their goverment, the goverment should fear it's people." -V

**applause**

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by wil

I cannot speak for the rest of the world but in the US, the general population does not have the interest or the education in order to make valid decisions on issues.

<< Smashes a head against the wall... an inferior, lesser educated, ill represented, uninformed, servile, oppressively tax'd, power-less, invalidated head. >>

[Postmaster]

Originally Posted by wil

I registered an overall no.

I cannot speak for the rest of the world but in the US, the general population does not have the interest or the education in order to make valid decisions on issues.

I am not in favor of Democracy (mobocracy) as giving the final vote to the general public virtually will always eliminate or bankrupt any gov't over time.

In the US such things as the abolishment of slavery, giving women the right to vote, civil rights, the American Disabilities Act....and on and on...would not have occurred if popular vote would have determined the fate of these bills/constitutional amendments.

However the positions held by people in the government are by ordinary people, representing ordinary people, voted for by ordinary. That's why my vote was a hell yeah. But saying that I think a country can be effectively ran by socialism, monarchy, dictatorship or democracy, it all depends on the quality of the leadership and people at that time. The Greeks did well under democracy and dictatorship throughout history. Defended themselves against the Persians under democracy and then robbed them rotten under dictatorship.

[bananabrain]

except that greek democracy was not in fact democracy as we understand it, particularly if you were a woman, a slave, or poor.

a constitution is worth very little if its words can be twisted, turned and misinterpreted to make it mean almost anything. i am sure the founding fathers of the united states did not have modern assault weapons and bazookas in mind when they put in the bit about the right to bear arms.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Postmaster]

G-d help us if we were using the Ancient Greek democratic system. We are still using the same fundemental part of the system today and that is, demos (the people) and kratos (strength). Still needs reform.

[Postmaster]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

a constitution is worth very little if its words can be twisted, turned and misinterpreted to make it mean almost anything. i am sure the founding fathers of the united states did not have modern assault weapons and bazookas in mind when they put in the bit about the right to bear arms.

b'shalom

bananabrain

Very true. I think the people who created the American constitution where very noble and responsible.

[Francis king]

I posted an overall yes- if the modern meaning of democracy is to be upheld, then the people themselves should create the constitution... as for the majority being ill-equipped to deal with such- I can't quite believe that was said, and am hoping it was irony...

regardless, our new pm Mr Brown has been talking about england having a bill of rights, a constitution of sorts, but at the same time they wold like to opt out of the EU human rights act... doublespeak, methinks... the lord's giveth, and the Lords taketh away...

[InLove]

Direct say in the Constitution? Well, if you mean that there should be one vote for every citizen of voting age, and this one vote should serve to elect representatives who reflect in action the words they promise to the voter, then I say not only say "yes", but "hell, yes!" And we should get rid of the electoral college altogether--haha! How about a separate vote for the vice prez?? Or are we too wimpy to figure out how to do that without a separate clause in there to insure that just in case the people "do not know how to properly use the vote" , then the elite have a backup?

One vote for each person. Elected representatives should keep their promises. Electoral college gone.

Just two cents from a disinterested, uneducated, and unworthy serf who still mistakenly (?) hopes that registering for and utilizing my right to vote means something.

InPeace,
InLove

[wil]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

However the positions held by people in the government are by ordinary people, representing ordinary people, voted for by ordinary.

That is why our job is to elect some extra ordinary people, elect someone we wish to 'represent' us as our representative.

Originally Posted by Francis king

as for the majority being ill-equipped to deal with such- I can't quite believe that was said, and am hoping it was irony...

Maybe the education is better over there, and the apathy less...but if you'd read the statistics of how people that are polled think, their abilities on geography, current events, political acuity...you wouldn't want your life or country in the hands of the public. Over here in the states people are buying houses and paying 50% of their income in house payments on zero interest or negative interest loans with monster balloon payments, forclosures at an all time high...and I want the electorate to make decisions?? Comedians make a living over here asking what July 4th means, what year the revolution was, and who we gained our independence from....the majority cannot answer those three questions...much less who the Vice President is or Russia's president.

I'd be willing to bet I could go to the post office and less than 5% of the people walking thru the door could name your former and current Prime Minister...

Seriously our country was so bigoted and racist in the 60's we had to use the national guard to enforce desegregation and civil rights....odds are if it wasn't legislated ...if it was upto the people we'd still not have voted it in. Folks here prefer a new Wallmart instead of upgrading the libraries...

[InLove]

Originally Posted by wil

Seriously our country was so bigoted and racist in the 60's we had to use the national guard to enforce desegregation and civil rights....odds are if it wasn't legislated ...if it was upto the people we'd still not have voted it in. Folks here prefer a new Wallmart instead of upgrading the libraries...

I don't know, wil. Are you sure you are not underestimating the American people? I mean, wasn't it the American people who protested so loudly and with their lives that brought forth the change in the legislation back in the 60's? I mean, if it had actually, truly been up to the mob rule, then we would have had no need to call in the National Guard, for there would have been no public opposition to Jim Crow and his predecessors. And there is almost always a controversy in the local scene when the Walmart wants to build....sometimes they don't even win! Sometimes, though, the people in a given community really do want the Walmart, something that people in the cities don't seem to understand. Now, I know that Walmart has some questionable practices, so that's when the people need to speak up and make it known. Walmart is not alone. Some of the worst offenders are those very companies who blast Walmart. These companies may or may not be contributing to the oppression in third world countries, but they certainly have no problem oppressing the Americans who work for them. Believe me, I know firsthand. I do agree with you, though, that the libraries in most places are woefully lacking. But I am not ready to trust a government who ignores its voting citizens as to what is available in those libraries.

InPeace,
InLove