Your country's government

Remove all ads!

@Iago: Hey, I'm just being considerate of our forum fellows from the US.

By the way: You forgot to mention that every faction in the parliament has a right on one seat in the federal council. That's why it's looking so weird.


@DarkStrider: That's rather cynical. Japan is worse.

 

United States - A Representative, Constitutional Democracy. While we have a government elected directly by the people, and the people can vote directly on some important issues (within their respective states), it is still done within the framework of the Constitution.

 

C'mon, Aik, tell us what you REALLY think - don't hold back!

But to give those of you who are unfamiliar but interested in the situation, here's a couple of recent links. Yes, it's really as bad as Aik said - actually, no, it's worse than that.

Spare the sermons and practice what you preach
PM told of AWB problems last June
Vaile to feel heat over wheat deals

And if you thought the Democrats were in disarray...

Crean enjoys huge preselection win
Bitter brawl goes public

 

Chandos... don't you find it hypocritical that we say we vote, but our votes mean nothing? If you want the people to decide, let the popular vote count, no? The electoral college is stupid... if 51% of california votes for Bush, he gets all 51 electoral votes. It should be percentage-based, if we are going to have an electoral college.

Personally, I think the US (us) is not a democracy, despite our claims.

 

The framers of the Constitution never intended the US to be a democracy. And it isn't one.

Based on the classic definition, there isn't a true democracy anywhere in the world today.

 

There can't be, except in small nations, because it would be very difficult to have 250 million people vote on every little matter... but at least in some large issues (like the presidential election), we should have a say.

 

Well, yes and no. Keep in mind that Thomas Jefferson nor John Adams were present at the Constitutional Convention 1787-88, since both were in Europe at the time. The idea that the "framers" did not intend a democracy is true to that extent that it was not a one-man-one-vote system, since large sections of the population could not vote. That changed after the election of Jefferson in 1800; one of the most pivital elections in the country's history. Both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson reformed much of the democratic short-comings of the original Convention.

It was really only as president that Jefferson realized that his radical form of republicanism was democracy. James Madison, who was one of the original Framers of the Constitution, an author of the Federalist Papers, was Jefferson's Vice President, and later became the fourth president himself. The presidency of Jefferson through Jackson's saw the transformation towards greater democracy in the United States. But the issue of the black and the woman's vote remained well into the last century. But the movement started by Jefferson and Madison has been towards democratic reform, which has been ongoing. Yet, it is still not perfect in some instatnces, as has been pointed out by the 2000 election.

 

Uhm, did you people see that two posts were deleted? And I thought I was intolerant & impatient...

[And your point is? The posts were devoid of content and this is not Whatnots - dmc]

Here in Argentina we try have a democracy. It's complicated cause we have other priorities, like not to starve. And our last presidents used this special ability ("decretos" can someone translate it for me?) so they didn't have to go through the whole process of law making. Years later, we now know it was both inconsitutional and insane. For instance, 195 young people died in a rock concert in a fire, because the place was overcrowded and didn't have proper safety measures. And this place was said to earn 20k per night. It's an example of how things work here. We the population don't have much control on what's going on here. At most, we can complain after damage has been done. Sometimes we don't even know; like I said, we're worried about inmediate issues, without time to look ahead.

[ March 10, 2006, 22:39: Message edited by: dmc ]

 

Constitutional monarch, with senate and house of representative. Courts with judge(s), without jury.

the problem,
The monarch has no prower at all (yes, that is the problem). Members from executive branch are formed by the majority party/alliance of legislative branch. See, the same guy controls two branches. The prime minister "suggest" judge to the monarch (dang!). Laws passed with or without signature of the monarch (double dang!). The same alliance of several parties has been ruling the nation since independance, and people still willingly vote for them (3x dang!).

Our constitution is some 180 articles long. Besides granting the usual rights, it also grants priviledge to the defined "bumiputra" (natives).
The bumiputra are,
1 - muslims
2 - habitually speak malay
3 - observe malay customs
4 - born in malaysia after independence or certain years before independence. (i think that's it).

So, the priviledge natives (60~70%),
- can buy houses at lower cost, regardless of their financial status.
- at least 30% of share holders has to be natives if you want your companies name is Kuala Lumpur Stock exchange.
- certian quota to be filled by them at several levels (univesity admission used to be one of it)
(worst i can think of, for now)

So, the rulling alliance, National Front, has been running a race and stability platform for as long as the Bible recorded. Three major parties of the alliance are racial based (UMNO for malays, MCA for chinese, MIC for indians). At state assembly level, out of 14, one is not control by National Front. PAS (pan-malaya islamic party) took the state of Kelantan.

So for a person, like me,
1 - not muslim
2 - habitually speaks chinese at home but fluent at malays (and english)
3 - use chopsticks to eat
4 - born in malaysia after independence
my vote is torn between the conservative racial quota enchaning National Front or the "vote for me and you will go to heaven" PAS.

Life is hard.

 

Wow. What country is this?


Some of these countries definately need reforms, methinks. Few people in power is not good, especially when they think they know their people, but in reality are old fashioned, traditional people who don't care what their people think.

Teekc, have you thought about leaving?

 

Allthough what i will say may seem radical, most countries of this planet need a total change not of the system but the persons who are in charge of this system.

This can either mean a revolution (which will mean also a change of the political system, and is not so good), or the passing of a law that forbids the same person to be elected for any constitutional position of power for more than two or three times.

Rather radical and extreme it may seems but the way our world is heading now, will-in the not so distant future-make this need more obvious.

 

I completely agree. 'Nuff said.

 

I completely disagree - what's the point in just changing the rulers when it's the system that allows bad rulers to have power? While the system has rulers there is always the potential for bad rulers...

Liriodelagua: I have read (in horribly biased anarchist propaganda, true) that Argentina has street co-operatives or something where smallish groups decide by consensus what to do for the community and then do it - how much of this is bull****, and how effective is it in reality?

 

Well...the government in our country is a democracy with the Congress in power at the moment. Ehh...they're doing an OK job I suppose...although the lack of infrastructure and rural development in the country is apalling to say the least.

Too many rungs in the government ladder I'm afraid.

 

Immigrate? not a chance. There is no country more suitable for me other than the country i am born into.

America, you can boast about its diversity but at the core, it is not. Christmas is a federal holiday in U.S. But for malaysia, Christmas, Deepavali, Chinese lunar new year and the Islamic calander new year are all federal holidays in Malaysia. i am not one of those people who would irresopnsibly argue with "if you don't like it, don't whatever it" arguement.

The system, has no big problem now. The problem is the people who are voting. National Front has been running the race and stability platform for a long time becuase there was a violent racial conflict between malays and chinese at the dawn of independence. People buy that, everytime. Parties that are not racial specific don't get wide support (stange huh?).

 

I like the way our government is formed and the way parties are elected. I've allways felt that a political enviorment where there are only two parties to elect from is no real democracy, if one of these is for one reason broken the second one will have almost unrestricted power. In Finland we have several parties with a significant amount of support forcing parties to form coaltion goverments.

However the current government I dislike. It's a coaltion between the Center Party the Socialdemocratic Party and the Swedish People's Party. Center Party and their decentralization planning sucks, Socialdemocratic Party and their union connections suck and the Swedish People's Party is licking up to the bigger parties, and their only platform is to protect the status of the Swedish language.

I would really like to see a cabinet with the National Coalition Party (a libertarian/right wing party) heading a coalition with the Center Party. It seems unlikely since the unions will be pissed if SDP is not included in the cabinet and unfortunately they hold quite a lot political power in this country and they can make the cabinet's life very difficult.

 

Teekc, I would say we are very diverse, racially at least. I would also say that our government doesn't really recognize that, however, and favors rich, white, christian, males.

I disagree with the statement that we are not diverse. I agree that it does not seem that way, though, based on religious holidays and the like.

And I apologize if I offended with the suggestion that you immigrate, I meant nothing offensive by it.


EDIT: And diversity is not only racial. Learning styles, gender, and what someone likes, are all forms of diversity. I will assume that you meant racial diversity when you said america wasn't diverse. I still disagree with that.

 

i was walking on the street one day, some high school kids (i would assume) drove pass me, one stuck his head out, yelling at me using an Asianic tone "In america, we drive car". That this how diverse america is, by looks.

Any country, society can be as diverse as defined but are there methods to let its people acknowledge that diversity? Sun dance is very importnat for Native Indians culture, but how many Americans know when and where is the Sun dance festival?

[ March 11, 2006, 22:27: Message edited by: teekc ]

 

There's often a difference between what a country claims to be, or is supposed to be, and what it really is.

There's a bumper sticker I saw that said "Canada: America done right."

 

@ Aik
I said that the change of people should be constant and at a very well structured pace.
The changing of the system means that from Democracy or Republic should turn to what??

I disagree with you in the rulers issue. When we are talking for a group of people or a country, the election of a leader is a critical issue. Because the leader is not (or better yet should not) be the one who bullies the others around to do the job.
He is supposed to be the one who takes the difficult decisions. The one who will plan a strategy, a plan of somekind in order to excell in the goal this group has set. And the one who will get the blame if that plan does not work.

I have witnessed some cases where the lack of a leader (or a distinct hierarcy) resulted in the profound delay of taking decisions at the right time.

The problem lies with the people not with the position.
And these people i say we must not let them grasp the positions and remain there.