Comments about ‘Letter: Democracy is ...’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, March 13 2014 10:30 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I agree with characteristics of Democracy pointed out. But Regarding the "How can the U.S. bring democracy to nations abroad, like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and the Ukraine"...

The US (or any outside nation) can not BRING Democracy to another nation. Just as Russia can't force Socialist principles be adopted by military force (whether the people there want it or not).

They have to want it themselves, and make it happen themselves. Democracy is a "bottom-up" thing. Not a "top-down" thing. It comes from the people (bottom-up) not the government/rulers (top-down).

We can HELP other nations, and support them. But we can't BRING Democracy to them. The brave experiment will not work if they don't want it badly enough to insist on it themselves, and respect the fallout. Because not everybody is always happy with the outcome in a Democracy. There will always be a minority. You have to be willing to accept that (even if YOU are in the minority).

Democracies don't always turn out the way the ruling class would like them to turn out. And the people can also be disappointed (example Egypt).

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

I agree with this letter's premise,
But that is not Democracy,
and America is not a Democracy.

It was founded on being a Democratic Rebublic,
but has morphed into a Plutocratic, Ogliarchy.

Oligarchic, Plutocractic, Corporatocracy.
[a Few, very Wealthy, Corporations]

The public voting has become nothing more than a carnival sideshow to muse the masses into thinking they have some say so and keep them revolting.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Unfortunately, OMM, you are right.

Sandy, UT

If the letter writer had substituted the words "responsible government" in place of the word "Democracy," then I would generally agree with him. It is not helpful when we use terms out of context and stretch the definitions so far that the words become meaningless. Democracy means "rule by the people"--no more and no less. It has nothing to do with individual liberties, welfare states, laissez-faire economics, or anything else.

Also, OMM, you are right. We are not a Democracy. Nor are we really a Democratic Republic. Not any more.

Deep Space 9, Ut

I hate to tell everybody this, including Robert Shinkoskey, but the US is not a Democracy. Gasp....Yes, we are not a Democracy. The US Constitution Section 4, Article 4 states "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

We are a Republic, not a Democracy. We elect representatives to handle voting for and enforcing laws.

To "Open Minded Mormon" actually it is morphing into a Socialist Republic. We have moved away from the original libertarian/capitalistic ideas of the Founding Fathers, and have moved left and are quickly approaching Fascism, but that should be passed within a couple of decades at our current rate of decline.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Unfortunately OOM and OMM are correct.

But I get the feeling their comments are mostly aimed at one party (not both). I hope not, because if you are intellectually honest you realize that big business owns both parties (not just one). That's why I am critical of both parties (not just one). It would be ludicrous to pretend just one is owned by big business.

Candidate Obama said there would be no CEOs in his cabinet... but then appoints GE CEO (John Immelt) to be his Jobs-czar and one of his closest whitehouse advisers, even though GE is notorious for sending most of it's jobs overseas, and paying almost no USA taxes.

Hmmm... that didn't really work out the way most people expected it would during the hope-and-change campaign.. did it? Big business still owned the White House, even after Bush left office. Hmmm...

I think the big companies that own American politics, are the ones that spend so much advertizing during the liberal extravaganza they call "Meet the Press". GE, Boeing, Lockhead Martin, Exxon Mobile, etc.

But they own it... regardless of which party is in power. Hope you realize that.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

I thought mike lee said that we were a compound constitutional republic?

Everett, 00

Deep Space 9, Ut
I hate to tell everybody this,
... have moved left and are quickly approaching Fascism, but

12:24 p.m. March 13, 2014


How can we be moving LEFT and approaching Fascism,
when everyone but you knows that Fascism is uber-far-RIGHT wing?


Your Utopian Land of Liberty in America still exists,
but you will just have to move to that 18th century cabin in the backwoods,
dig your own well,
clear your own roads,
hunt your own game,
pick your own berries,
and hope and pray you never need a Fireman, Policeman, or Doctor.

Oh, and public utilies
[water, sewer, garbage, gas, and power] don't exist in your neighborhood of make-believe.
You won't have to pay taxes!

BTW --
I always find it hypocritical of those who say they are "true Patriots", and uber- National, and are constantly trash talking America.


But they own it... regardless of which party is in power. Hope you realize that.
12:32 p.m. March 13, 2014

That's why I'm unaffiliated.

Pasedena, CA

To "airnaut" if only you understood the Lef-Right political spectrum. The fact of the matter is that on the far left you have Communism, then progressing to the right you have Socialism, Fascism, Capitalism, then Anarchy on the far right.

So, from your Communist viewpoint, fascism is on the right. However, if you put the center at a point where government begins to interfere in personal lives, Fascism is on the left.

The problem is that you are looking at the Left-Right political spectrum from a point where Communism is on the left and Socialism is to the right. This is a European socialist view of the political spectrum. However, we are not in Europe, and the correct vantage point is where I have listed it.

Another funny thing about you is that you say you don't believe in the "all or nothing" view of life, yet here you show that if it isn't all socialist, then it must be anarchy. All or nothing.

Gilbert, AZ

One can substitute the word Communism for democracy and you would be correct on everything in this letter except voting. Even though an avid Communist will tell you that Communist party members vote for their leaders.
I worry that there are people that think that social and economical engineering are the answer to life's problems.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Airnaut - I have relatives that are conservative so I speak a bit of their language. Let me translate Redshirt's response to you: "Airnaut, you are wrong because you are using a frame of reference based on major political philosophy and the general public's agreed-upon terminology. In order to be correct you must use the fictitious theories that I have set forth which have no basis in reality or political science because I just concocted them from my basement."

Redshirt - I cannot convey how hilarious it is to see you belittling someone for not fully understanding the American political spectrum and then watch you describe it in purely linear terms. Thank you for providing my dose of conservative-based entertainment for the day.

Everett, 00

@Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Airnaut - I have relatives that are conservative so I speak a bit of their language.


Because I'm completely unable to make any sense of it.

I took PolSci in College,
served in the United States Military,
and work for the DoD.

I know I have a pretty good idea what Left or Right is,
and I have a pretty good idea who America's REAL enemy is.

Fascism LEFT-wing?
I'm sure 85 million dead people from WWII just rolled over in their graves, ashes, what have you.

USS Enterprise, UT

To "airnaut" actually, those that died in WWII cringe everytime they see your ilk professing that Fascism is right wing. They know that they were up against socialists that put on a capitalist veneer. Sad when some people won't call a collectivist a collectivist.

To "Stalwart Sentinel" it is sad when liberals claim to understand conservatives. Studies show that liberals do not understand conservatives, but conservatives understand liberals.

Mister J
Salt Lake City, UT

re: Redshirt1701

"and have moved left and are quickly approaching Fascism, but that should be passed within a couple of decades at our current rate of decline."

We are not quite at V for Vendetta level but we IMO are already a quasi-fascist nation.

Look at how... 1a) corporations and their special interests call the shots, 1b) politicians give lip service to everyone but the rich, 2) much we idolize the military and use force at the drop off a hat internationally, & 3) we are not a domestic police state but obsess about being secure over being free

Most has taken place since Reagan left office. Moral of the story... stop electing Ivy Leaguers!!!

p.s. Fascism is a left wing movement. After Progressives, it breaks off 1 fork is to Socialism then to Communism. The other is Fascism.

Moab, UT

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. That is why our Founding Fathers had the good sense to make our Govt. a Republic with a constitution.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Redshirt - I never claimed to understand you; I claimed that I could speak some of your language b/c I've had to make sense of similar backwards-thinking, fictitious arguments coming from conservatives in the past.

Of course conservatives can understand liberals but not the other way around. Liberals have a tendency to base their reasoning on sound, logical factors such as math, science, history, sociology, etc.... Whereas conservatives almost exclusively base their reasoning off their own unique belief systems ie religion. In all seriousness, go through the comments sections on the DesNews and you'll find that nearly all the conservative commentary will stem from people who have a very finite set of personal moral convictions that serve as the foundation for their political assertions. Their stance on abortion, climate change, welfare, marriage equality, you name it, are not based on the realities of the world but rather on their predisposed views stemming from a specific religion. For example, there are people reading this right now who deny that climate change could ever be human-caused due to what God said to Noah after the flood. How can you possibly expect we liberals to reason with unreasonable people?

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Your rant just made Red's point and illustrated it perfectly.

Not all Conservatives are religious nuts. They aren't even all religious.

They also aren't all pro-business (on everything). The left keeps insisting that if you are conservative... you want businesses to keep hiring illegal aliens, and don't want to do anything to keep businesses from hiring illegal aliens. That's your assumption, based on your stereotype for "Conservatives". That doesn't make it true (anywhere outside your head).

Fact is... Conservatives DON'T support businesses hiring illegal workers, and want to punish those who do (ref Bush's Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill and all legislation on immigration they have supported... it all focuses on verifying workers are legal, temp work permits, and punishing companies that hire illegals).

They aren't all religious nuts, who base all their political views on their religious beliefs.

They don't hate the poor... they just have a different way of helping them (jobs instead of handouts).

They don't all fit neatly into the left's stereotypes for them. Once you realize that... you will be able to communicate with them.

USS Enterprise, UT

To "Stalwart Sentinel" actually, liberals don't have a sound reasoning methodology.

Studies show that liberals do not use math, science, or logic as the basis of their reasoning. The proof of this is simply the fact that a majority of Scientists and Engineers are conservative. Liberals dominate the touchy-feely fields.

Go ahead and keep believing what you want, but there is additional proof out there that Conservatives have a better understanding of science than liberals do. See "Eureka! Tea partiers know science" in Politico.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

2 bits - Statistically speaking, nearly all conservatives do self-associate as being religious (depending on the study, roughly 75-95%). Sorry, it's just the factual truth. Further, when you drill down, nearly every single social/political position taken by conservatives is based on their twisted interpretations of religious dogma. Reason, logic, statistics, etc... do not factor in. Rather, they use words like "believe" when discussing climate change as though science is something you can choose not to believe. Your foundation is based on belief, nor reality and is therefore unsound, it is no wonder your political viewpoints follow suit.

Redshirt - Pew Poll "Only Six Percent Of Scientists Are Republicans." The article further states 55% claim to be Democrat. You've gone to a new level of fictitious reasoning when you claim 6 is greater than 55. Conservative math, I guess. All facets of higher education and business demonstrate a direct correlation with liberal leanings. Don't take my word for it - look at all the best higher education, economic sectors, tech industry, etc.... They're all located in liberal strongholds. Unfortunately, even the article you cite states, "people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative."

USS Enterprise, UT

To "Stalwart Sentinel" if you look at engineers, and if you define scientists as the hard sciences. You know, physics, Chemistry, and things like that, the majority are conservative. Did you bother to look to see what scientists are democrats? It is the soft sciences, you know, the ones that don't need logic and actualy hard data.

Being a Republican does not mean that they are conservative, Lindsey Gram is proof of that.

Yes education is dominated by liberals, except for the hard sciences, which are dominated by....Conservatives. Why is it that liberals are not even 50% of the hard sciences? Could it be that they can't handle the logic?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments