The
Crisis of Democracy was authored by the Tri-Lateral Commission who were elite liberal intellectual internationals from the US, Europe, and Japan in the early 1970's. In it, they argued that there is an
excess of Democracy and need to find ways of pushing back against the new wave of public opinion from the lower formerly disenfranchised classes. In their view (very similar to that of Socrates in
The Republic) is that these
lower classes are unfit to make rational decisions about society that will effect all of us (not just them) and therefore
should be politically/socially disenfranchised because they are
bound to make all sorts wrong decisions that any
sensible person/society understands that the
higher classes are best fit to make all of these decisions. In
The Crisis of Democracy, they made an argument that there is becoming a serious problem with
over-education amongst the populace that was newly occurring (in the early 1970's onward). Their reasoning was now that more people are getting Undergrad. level degrees, as well as Masters level, ect. that these
lower classes that in truth do not possess the same high level intellect/education that the
higher classes (i.e. the elite Liberal intellectuals and possibly some elite intellectuals on the right as well but that point is unclear in their writing)) and that the *lower classes* should
in no way be given the false impression that they (even though they are becoming notably more educated) are as qualified to make serious decisions (i.e. engage in the political process) that the elites are (i.e. the Elites should be making the rules, so to speak). Thus, the *"Crisis of Democracy" is that political activism is leading to *too many* people being involved in the political process and this needs to be pushed back against in order to maintain a more stable, healthy, productive system.
I would also highly recommend reading the Crisis of Democracy as well as it is in many ways a softer modern day parallel to the type of thinking seen in Plato's Republic. Here is a link to the Crisis of Democracy: http://trilateral.org/download/doc/crisis ofdemocracy.pdf
What do you think? Do our modern societies tend to suffer from an "Excess in Democracy" or is there Too Little Democracy?
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
During the development of the US Constitution, based on the foundation of the US Declaration of Independence, the US founding fathers followed the French political philosopher Charles de Montesquieu resulting in a republic form of government, not a democracy.
If one was to read the US Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Fifty States’ Constitutions, you will not find the word “democracy” in any of those documents. Why? The answer is found in Federalist Paper #10 where Madison states:
“Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
In other words, democracies are mob-rule irrespective of an individual’s “unalienable Rights.”
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.76  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 59%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 77%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.5  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm not an anarchist because I know that anarchy is unfeasible since no minority doesn't want to look out for itself so 'majority wins' mentality is NEVER EVER going to last in any sense.
What is true nonetheless is that anarchy ensures most win simply because the only outcome of all having equal chance to harm others is that the truly malicious end up killed off in the long run since most prefer tamed beasts to wild, unpredictable ones and so begins a police force and so begins a system whereby a government forms and then the majority slowly end up sheep to the shepherds et voila, democracy is defeated by itself.
  Considerate: 61%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.9  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 86%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.02  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
Winston Churchill (House of Commons, 11 November 1947)
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 20%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 75%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 2.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 18%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.16  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 51%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 46%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 87%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.76  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 2%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.88  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 31%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.86  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
The first problem is the lack of proper political education. You see people getting the wackiest ideas about how the world works or how it should work, and if you talk to some of them, you will see that all of their ideas are taken from Youtube and Twitter at best, and from TV shows and mainstream video games at worst. When people are so horribly uninformed, and when the system of Electoral College is so twisted compared to how the Founding Fathers designed it, then you get the exact problem both Socrates and the Founding Fathers warned about: apolitical people electing political leaders. This is a very fertile soil for the growth of populists who exploit people's ignorance and naivety in order to execute a quick power grab and suck the resources out of the nation under various fearmongering pretenses.
The second problem is the inadequacy of governmental centralization in a modern society. Democracy works when a town of a few thousand people elects a new sheriff, where everyone can talk to each candidate in person and get a first-hand impression of them. When everyone knows every candidate closely, when many of them have had close friendly relations for a long time and know who it is they vote for - and the sheriffs know who it is they serve.
Direct democracy does not work well when a nation of 300+ million elects a president. Almost nobody from this nation knows this president in person, and the president definitely does not have the interest of each single individual out of the 300+ million people in mind when doing their job. This leads to increase of political apathy, when people see the elections and the political process in general more as a TV show, than as something directly impacting their lives. And TV shows are not the perfect environment for the rise of talented politicians.
As such, I think the solution to this problem would necessarily include two aspects:
- Reform of school education. People should have a vast political background by the time they graduate from high school, with a lot of questions they have thought through, with a lot of evaluated debates they have participated in. The focus should be on the formation of the individual opinion based on the presented evidence, and not on the indoctrination of the pupils into a specific ideology.
- Decentralization of power. As much political power as possible should be transferred from the federal government to the state governments. As much political power as possible should be transferred from the state governments to the municipal governments. As much political power as possible should be transferred from the municipal governments to the "neighborhood governments". Make it so everyone knows who they vote for and why, and what the implications of that vote are.
There are many more problems to discuss, of course, such as the influence of the Internet on how democracy functions, or the effects globalization has on the politics on the national level. But I think doing those two major reforms would already reverse, at least, a century worth of growing corruption and incompetence - so it would be a great start.  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.88  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
Make it a representative democracy. This means that you will elect an individual who will represent the policies you believe in. The people you vote in would most likely be politicians who will know how to go about implementing the policies you believe in and won't have the ridiculous ideas that the uneducated have.
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.28  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra