• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is It Possible To Be a Dictator in a Democratic Government?

J

jiggajay

Junior Member
Just an essay in my class that was on the final I just got done taking. My contention was yes, because our government is not truly democratic, and it goes to an upper elite to make the decisions. wasn't really sure...
 
I'd definately say it's impossible. Democracy is rule of the people by the people, so if one man has control over the people and the people have no way to get rid of him, how can that situation be democratic?
 
Ehhh, the words dictator and democratic have very broad meanings.

Ancient Rome was ruled by a "dictator" as siad by many but it was fairly "democratic", although of course not entirely.
 
In a democracy, the people can become the "dictator." If the democracy approaches mob rule, potentially worse than any single dictator imaginable.
 
Many countries called themselves democracy, while in reality power are still only in the hand of several strong people. Take a look at Indonesia under Suharto, Yugoslavia under Tito, and Malaysia under Mahathir.
 
The jist of my essay was this...

"George Bush Wasn't Even
Elected By The Democratic
Process, Neither Will Iraq's Future Leader Be"

If he wasn't elected by the democratic process, then that's basically allowing for the option that a dictator could be put in place...

something like that

 
Originally posted by: jiggajay
The jist of my essay was this...

"George Bush Wasn't Even
Elected By The Democratic
Process, Neither Will Iraq's Future Leader Be"

If he wasn't elected by the democratic process, then that's basically allowing for the option that a dictator could be put in place...

something like that
Click to expand...

How as he not ELECTED by the democratic process?
 
Originally posted by: jiggajay
The jist of my essay was this...

"George Bush Wasn't Even
Elected By The Democratic
Process, Neither Will Iraq's Future Leader Be"

If he wasn't elected by the democratic process, then that's basically allowing for the option that a dictator could be put in place...

something like that
Click to expand...


Well unless you're Moonbeam or Michael Moore, he was elected by the usual American process. Whether you think the American process is democratic or not, can be argued I suppose.
 
The "American process" isn't supposed to be "democratic." We're a republic. If we were a true democracy (*shudders*), then the state I live in would cease to have any meaning, as CA and NY would rule the whole US.

edited: typo
 
Originally posted by: jiggajay
The jist of my essay was this...

"George Bush Wasn't Even
Elected By The Democratic
Process, Neither Will Iraq's Future Leader Be"

If he wasn't elected by the democratic process, then that's basically allowing for the option that a dictator could be put in place...

something like that
Click to expand...

I suggest you read up on our electoral college. Bush was elected by the process set forth in the Constitution. Deal with it, or pass an amendment doing away with it.

 
i hardly feel as though bush was elected through an electoral process, seeing as how he was appointed by the supreme court. At least four of the US Supreme Court justices who gave Bush the presidency were either appointed by his father, had sons working for law firms representing GW in the contested election lawsuits or had publicly stated that they had a strong personal commitment to making sure Gore never became President. Justice Scalia said he'd resign if Gore became President. Justice O'Conner said she could not retire if Gore became President because a liberal Justice would replace her. Both Justices Rhenquist and Scalia have sons working for Bush lawfirms involved in the election. Justice Thomas' wife works for both the far right Heritage Foundation and the Bush transition team. These Justice's flawed and highly partisan ruling trashed the entire idea of States rights-the very same conservative ideology they have so vigorously defended-not to mention the rule of law, equal protection and the idea of judicial impartiality and restraint.

How is that, when the Court itself is so biased, you can rule out the possibility that a dictator can not be put in place. I'm not saying Bush is a dictator. I'm saying it was possible he could have been and my whole point is if we don't go through the people then a dictator cannot be so easily ruled out.
 
Yes, it's possible. Consider a person named Richard Tater who becomes president of the US. He is otherwise known as Dick Tater. Therefore we have a Dick Tater in a Democratic Government. If you get an A+ on your essay there is no need to thank me. I just like helping my fellow ATOTer's...
 
and Dudd, I'm quite clear on the process of our electoral college. democracy is where people have the choice is it not?
then how is it that bush assumed office despite having lost the election by more than a half a million votes. by a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court. tell me how that's my choice being portrayed and carried out? and even more, tell me how the hell its your choice being voiced?
 
Originally posted by: StormRider
Yes, it's possible. Consider a person named Richard Tater who becomes president of the US. He is otherwise known as Dick Tater. Therefore we have a Dick Tater in a Democratic Government. If you get an A+ on your essay there is no need to thank me. I just like helping my fellow ATOTer's...
Click to expand...

LOL!

😀
 
wow millenium, that's a lot of info you're giving there to discredit my information. why not use your head and logic to reason than to critiisize with blind passion? how are those lies? they're documented quotes. and documented truths.
 
Originally posted by: jiggajay
and Dudd, I'm quite clear on the process of our electoral college. democracy is where people have the choice is it not?
then how is it that bush assumed office despite having lost the election by more than a half a million votes. by a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court. tell me how that's my choice being portrayed and carried out? and even more, tell me how the hell its your choice being voiced?
Click to expand...

I'm a registered Democrat and I voted for Gore. I consider George Bush to be my legitimate president. I wish people would just move on -- Gore did and he did it with class.
 
StormRider, i agree with you completely. i also believe in what bush is doing and i don't think he's a dictator. but the essay has brought the issue up, and then these people with not enough background information trying to start a flamefest. i've moved on, i'm just postanalyzing and considering what could have been the outcome.
 
Originally posted by: Millennium
Originally posted by: jiggajay
i hardly feel as though bush was elected through an electoral process, seeing as how he was appointed by the supreme court. At least four of the US Supreme Court justices who gave Bush the presidency were either appointed by his father, had sons working for law firms representing GW in the contested election lawsuits or had publicly stated that they had a strong personal commitment to making sure Gore never became President. Justice Scalia said he'd resign if Gore became President. Justice O'Conner said she could not retire if Gore became President because a liberal Justice would replace her. Both Justices Rhenquist and Scalia have sons working for Bush lawfirms involved in the election. Justice Thomas' wife works for both the far right Heritage Foundation and the Bush transition team. These Justice's flawed and highly partisan ruling trashed the entire idea of States rights-the very same conservative ideology they have so vigorously defended-not to mention the rule of law, equal protection and the idea of judicial impartiality and restraint.

How is that, when the Court itself is so biased, you can rule out the possibility that a dictator can not be put in place. I'm not saying Bush is a dictator. I'm saying it was possible he could have been and my whole point is if we don't go through the people then a dictator cannot be so easily ruled out.
Click to expand...

You are a fvcking moronic troll and nothing you said had a single ounce of truth behind it. Rescind your life you liberal ass.
Click to expand...

Damn, you make a strong arguement Millenium
rolleye.gif
 
do you know how to read millenium? how did i post something that proves my point? i posted that to show that he was not elected by a democratic process in my opinion. my question was could a DICTATOR be put in place through the electoral process? passion blinds my friend, just as one can see through your blind aggressiveness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top