| |
|
It can be argued that the US has the most open, fairest democracy in the world.
Yet Bush remains that country's leader due to vote rigging, discounting large numbers of votes, and in spite of actually losing the "Popular" vote. (The one person = one vote thing is ignored when it comes to many systems.)
Argue if you will that the UK is not the US and that things are different, Buk, but you cannot convince me that democratic elections are by definition, "Fair", in all practices, even in the UK. Although the burden of proof is not upon you, you still have no proof that all votes are counted as cast. You also cannot prove that a vote for candidate X produces result X, and that if it doesn't, simply vote for someone else next time.
No the burden of proof rests with me, and I cannot point to solid proof to back up my claims... However, I still think that general elactions in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, and most of the west are identical to elections held in High School: You vote for candidates approved or chosen by the school Administration. Attempts to jam the election will be ignored or punished. After you've voted someone in, they do exactly what the Administration tells them to do. The status quo is kept and people go on with their studies, like it or not. Again, this is my personal belief based on speculation.
You ask for alternatives: The people who claw their way to the top to a "democratically" elected position often violently oppose alternatives to democracy. The rabid anti-socialist policies of many democratic societies such as the US attest to this. While the UK is miles ahead of the US when it comes to social programs, I believe that the discussion to privatize many services is becoming a growing concern even there.
As long as capitalism and a dependency on a monetary system exists, democracy as a system has too great a potential to be corrupt. |
|
|
