The decline of democracy

[core_88]

So according to wikipedia witch is never wrong and the Guardian and a couple of other newspapers trust in the government and voting participation has both declined lately, in the case of vote participation it has steadily gone downhill since the 60's in the western world and there is no one clear reason for this (other then the colossal fuckups in later years by various governments).
Some scientists has blamed the TV other the welfare state (mostly debunked), when asked most say that they don't have time (there has not been any lessening of leisure time since the 50's)
but generation after generation has participated less and less in both national and local government, the only things increasing in participation is single cause politics such as demonstrations, funding of political campaigns and boycotts.

Now the reason for this lengthy intro is that i will be writing a bit about this and possible solutions in a debate article and i want to ask this board if for example direct democracy or an e-democracy would be a solution or perhaps forcing a public vote in case a cause gets enough support (say a million signs it or so) or even better if you yourself can think of an alternative.
It's always interesting to get an opinion from people outside my usual social circle so as to not get too narrowminded so please answer with your thoughts on this.

 

[PCHeintz72]

Trust in government has actually had ups and downs over the last few decades, it has not truly been a simple straight and steady downward trend...

A large part has to do with all the various government scandals, both personal, and ones that are on the job. There have been dozens, each corroding the peoples belief in that the government is actually made of good people doing their job.

Another aspect is the growing lack of belief that the representatives are truly acting in the interest of the people they represent, and more in the interests of the special interests groups and big corporations.

The U.S. has had in the last 4 decades plenty of scandals. Not just at the state level such as the IL one several years back with the guy whom refused to leave office and made tons of suspect decisions. But at the congressional and white house levels, and even the national ones... We've had Watergate. We've had Travelgate. We've had the recession and bailouts. We've had congressmen and past presidents in sex scandals and drug scandals. We've had weapons smuggling operations. Betrays of the public by the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA. The NSA specifically was damaging as it has cost us multiple valuable contracts. We've had the White House email scandals. We've even had one White house aide mysteriously commit suicide on the opposite side of town under very mysterious circumstances and a suspect note 'found' in his office days later. We've had misappropriations. We've had the HUGE embarrassing budget talks several times. We've had to deal with the government supporting countries that publicly have declared in glee they would go to war against us if the opportunity was provided. And that is not even remotely all of them.

Other countries are *not* immune to having their faith in their governments shaken by scandal... look at the recent events in Canada with the Toronto Mayor, or the French with the sex scandal involving their president.

So yeah... I can see why people, particularly the younger generations, are not exactly as enthusiastic about our government any more. They simply cannot be trusted to not act like morons or to act in the best interest of the people that put them into office.

 

[core_88]

Yeah trust in government had more ups and down in the west but voter participation has gone steadily down since the 60's in the whole western world sorry i should have made that more clear.

 

[T.L]

Voter participation is declining in my opinion due to apathy.
People see the corruption, the pork-barreling, the petty squabbling and just give up.
It seems to be not just related to the style of government either. Presidential or Westminister.
In my country where it is compulsory to vote, Our population takes an active interest in our political masters. They know it and we know it. So if they do something stupid, Then they know that they are out at the next poll.
Right or wrong our system seems to work just fine.
Perhaps our forefathers saw the typical laziness of our citizens at the time of federation and decided to nip the issue in the bud. Nonetheless it works and for one I am glad it does.

 

[core_88]

That's Australia right?
There are few nations who have that and enforce the law, Italy had that but didn't enforce it Greece still have but doesn't enforce it either.

 

[mgsaintz]

Another reason could be the lack of civic classes in high school level, with US education on the decline they've done away with preparing high schoolers in understanding how government works, their roles in the system, preparing to vote on local, state, or national level.

 

[daniel_gudman]

[Citations Needed]


I am suspicious of all hypotheses that boil down to "things are getting worse!"

I mean, all I'm seeing in this thread is "this is my impression and/or feelings, here's an opinion without any supporting evidence."

 

[Altered Nova]

I think voter turnout in America is kind of low for a couple reasons. One, there's a lot of voter suppression going on. Republicans, especially after the Supreme Court partially struck down the Voting Rights Act of 1965, have been going hog wild for practically forever passing laws making it harder for minorities, students, and the poor to vote because they tend to Democrat. And two, there's a lot of apathy because no one can tell who the fuck is telling the truth about anything. Politicians lie through their teeth constantly and there are no laws that will punish them for it and virtually no one in the media will call them out for lying. So when people see attack ads for both sides accusing each other of being the worst scum on earth and denying any similar claims made by the opposition against themselves it's a bit understandable that few people want to vote because unless you really research this shit you will have no idea how any politician will actually swing on any given issue.

 

[core_88]

[Citations Needed]


I am suspicious of all hypotheses that boil down to "things are getting worse!"

I mean, all I'm seeing in this thread is "this is my impression and/or feelings, here's an opinion without any supporting evidence."

Sorry here have some links: CNBC
The Guardian
Wikipedia on voter turnout
Crisis situations and unrest in Europe since 2000 according to wikipedia
OECD Newsroom article about government trust

There were some more that i browsed so if you want more links i can put them up but most are only a search engine away.
[hr]

[Citations Needed]


I am suspicious of all hypotheses that boil down to "things are getting worse!"

I mean, all I'm seeing in this thread is "this is my impression and/or feelings, here's an opinion without any supporting evidence."

Sorry here have some links: CNBC
The Guardian
Wikipedia on voter turnout
Crisis situations and unrest in Europe since 2000 according to wikipedia
OECD Newsroom article about government trust

There were some more that i browsed so if you want more links i can put them up but most are only a search engine away.

 

[T.L]

After looking into US politics,
I have come to the conclusion that it is completely broken and stuffed.
It is little wonder that the public take little interest in voting when it has been corrupted by the people who run the system.

 

[daniel_gudman]

CNBC

The data this article is based (that line chart) on shows trust in government went up and then back down to where it started in 2007, for no real net change, while trust in business has gone up.

So what the reporter is saying doesn't match the data they're reporting on.

The Guardian

This is based on the exact same data as above: The Edelman survey that came out before the last Davos conference.

And it's only talking about 2011-2012 numbers.

...So assuming you're willing to take the Largest public-relations firm in the world at face value, this is a critical time when you need to be spending more effort on increasing your perception of trustworthiness... perhaps by hiring a public relations firm?

I mean, assuming that humongous Recession isn't the real cause of the dearth of trust in institutions, as opposed to a failing in democracy in general? Which maybe has different lessons than "democracy is broken."

Wikipedia on voter turnout

Yeah I also read that. Scroll down: Maybe the whole article is bunk.

Crisis situations and unrest in Europe since 2000 according to wikipedia

I clicked the link and

Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name.

OECD Newsroom article about government trust

The financial and economic crisis and its aftermath have led many OECD governments to implement structural adjustment plans to restore the health of their public finances. However, trust in governments has declined considerably, as citizens' growing expectations have been hard to address with limited government resources. Between 2007 and 2012, confidence in national governments declined from 45% to 40% on average, making it difficult for national authorities to mobilize support for necessary reforms.

A new approach to public governance is needed if governments are to meet citizens' expectations with the limited means at hand. This approach should be built around creating strategic capacity, strong institutions, effective instruments and processes and clear measurable outcomes. The indicators presented in Government at a Glance 2013 show how far OECD countries have progressed towards developing that strategic state.

So basically, another one about how general trust is down since the Great Recession.


...But also: OECD countries have been doing so well that citizens' baseline expectations have gone up. If that's the "decline of democracy", then... sign me up for more, I guess???

 

[core_88]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_situations_and_unrest_in_Europe_since_2000
sorry derped when linking

 

[core_88]

Looks like i was a bit biased (a lot) but there are some other studies that kinda support my initial view although it looks like many are stable with countries like Spain, Portugal and Ireland has declined along with a few more.
Some more links: voter turnout in western Europe
CEPS

Swedish vote participation (basically sasys that it went down overall since the 80's with a small upswing last two elections.

World voting

 

[core_88]

And yeah apparently you can lose your right to vote permanently if you are convicted for a felony in some states in the US?

 

[ThreadWeaver]

And yeah apparently you can lose your right to vote permanently if you are convicted for a felony in some states in the US?

Actually, 11 states make it permanently illegal to vote once you've been convicted of a felony. Twenty say that you get to vote after you've served your time plus parole time plus probation time. Four states say you can vote after time served plus parole time. Thirteen more say you can vote after your time served. Only two have no restrictions on which criminals can vote:Maine and Vermont.

Personally I believe that once convicted of a felony it should be a Federal Law that you can't vote anymore, but that's just my opinion.

It's a current Federal Law that no person convicted of a felony can own a firearm, though.

 

[PCHeintz72]

Personally I believe that once convicted of a felony it should be a Federal Law that you can't vote anymore, but that's just my opinion.

It's a current Federal Law that no person convicted of a felony can own a firearm, though.

While I'm fine with the firearms restriction, personally I think it wrong to remove the right to vote based on a felony...

 

[core_88]

And yeah apparently you can lose your right to vote permanently if you are convicted for a felony in some states in the US?

Actually, 11 states make it permanently illegal to vote once you've been convicted of a felony. Twenty say that you get to vote after you've served your time plus parole time plus probation time. Four states say you can vote after time served plus parole time. Thirteen more say you can vote after your time served. Only two have no restrictions on which criminals can vote:Maine and Vermont.

Personally I believe that once convicted of a felony it should be a Federal Law that you can't vote anymore, but that's just my opinion.

It's a current Federal Law that no person convicted of a felony can own a firearm, though.

But the purpose of prison is to reform so shouldn't those that have served their time be allowed to vote?

 

[mgsaintz]

Prison isn't there to reform but to keep 'undesirables' out of regular society, many of the state laws to disenfranchise convicts was design to restrict voters of African American descent who make up a good chunk of the prison population.

 

[Altered Nova]

In many socialist countries the purpose of prison is to reform, but not in America. We just love to punish and ostracise people we view as undesirable. There's a reason we have less than 5% of the world's population, but almost a quarter of it's prisoners.

Also our government fucking hates drugs. Like 50% of federal prisoners and 20% of state prisoners are incarcerated for non-violent drug related charges. Seriously, with how high drug crime sentences have been ratcheted up over the decades and all the "Three Strikes" laws that keep getting passed, you are likely to spend less time in prison for murdering someone than for being caught with weed in your pocket three or four times. Not even joking.

And it's worse if you are black. Black and white people use marijuana at roughly the same rate, but black people are vastly more likely to be arrested for it and serve much longer prison sentences. Our justice system is really fucking racist.

 

[daniel_gudman]

Prison isn't there to reform but to keep 'undesirables' out of regular society,

Retributive ("punish law-breakers and deter others with punishment") vs. Reformative ("fix anti-social behavior") vs. Reclusive ("prevent criminals from committing more crimes") Justice is a debate that's been going on for like, literally thousands of years.

Prisons (like almost all punishments meted out by law) can be explained by all three ideologies, so it's not like it's one OR the other, but practically, all of the above.

 

[T.L]

So if you commit a crime in one of those 11 states, Can you move to a new state and still vote?
If so, Then what is the point.
Incarceration removes ones rights due to criminal acts.
But we are told once you have served your sentence you get those rights back.
(whether it is right or wrong is a separate debate)
So therefore in at least 11 states, You are being punished again by having your democratic right to vote as a free person, living in a democracy removed. :wacko:

No wonder US politics gives me a headache.

 

[Schema]

I refuse to be their pawn. I wont elect someone who is already corrupt.

 

[ThreadWeaver]

I refuse to be their pawn. I wont elect someone who is already corrupt.

"Show me a politician that isn't corrupt and I'll show you a person that hasn't been in politics very long." -Me

T.L-
Once you've served your time and any parole/probation time, then yes, you could move to another state. However, that may be years beyond your actual release from prison. That's probably why there's a class of states that only disallows voting until those three things are done.

The problem with "reform" in the U.S. penal system is that for a large number of people, the "reform" part doesn't work because they don't WANT to reform. In their minds, it's them against "The Man" and they'll be damned if they let The Man win.

 

[daniel_gudman]

The problem with "reform" in the U.S. penal system is that for a large number of people, the "reform" part doesn't work because they don't WANT to reform. In their minds, it's them against "The Man" and they'll be damned if they let The Man win.

[Citation Needed]

 

[ThreadWeaver]

The problem with "reform" in the U.S. penal system is that for a large number of people, the "reform" part doesn't work because they don't WANT to reform. In their minds, it's them against "The Man" and they'll be damned if they let The Man win.

[Citation Needed]

Don't have a citation for first hand accounts I get from the police in the family...