“democracy is mor
democracy is more effective than its other alternatives:1. promotes equality: one of democracy’s underlying principles is equality among citizens. it tries to stop discrimination on the basis of caste, religion, region or sex.2. enhances dignity of the individual: democracy does not allow the dignity or the basic rights of a person to be violated.3. improves the quality of decision-making: since decision-making power is not concentrated in one hand, democracy ensures an unbiased system of checks and balances.explanation: democracy largely derives its power from the citizen itself. unlike other forms of government, it prioritizes the welfare of citizens through the citizens themselves.
the whole world wants democracy.

notice that none of them want republicacy. The demo is free, yes. it is a good option it's better vote for marc, he'll give the country a spark i support, and have already voted for president trump. fox they are not repeating the talking points of the democratic machine. absolutely not. the proposal to abolish the electoral college is the horrid, but depressingly predictable, symptom of a populist age.populism is not a schematic philosophy but is rather an attitude toward culture and politics characterized by the veritable worship of "the common man," a distrust of elites, a wariness toward complexity and - significantly - a deep dislike of established institutions. (called these days, "the establishment" or "the swamp.") in this, then, the movement to abolish the electoral college is part of a larger current running through the society.indeed, at the same time that there have been calls to abolish the electoral college, there have also been calls to abolish the u. s. senate, or abolish the filibuster, to pack the supreme court (or limit the terms of justices or make other changes), to raise the voting age to 16 and in some cases to allow illegal immigrants to vote. what all of these have in common is that they take a torch to established institutions, particularly those institutions that put a break on the pure expression of the popular will.indeed, this is not just a phenomenon on the democratic side of the aisle at the moment. the republicans have been vocal in their attacks on the "media" - as if that were a single entity - and on silicon valley - which in the popular mode of the hour has discriminated and oppressed conservatives, it is alleged.most of all, republican who are feigning outrage over senator warren's call to abolish the electoral college are forgetting that one donald j. trump has advocated its abolition as well - at least until it helped him win. mr. trump - like all good populists - is no slave to consistency, after all.at any rate, abolition of the electoral college would be a horrid idea. it would effectively disenfranchise huge swaths of the country as both parties would camp out in california, new york, texas, florida and maybe ohio, leaving the rest of the country to itself. this would also very likely set the stage for the rise of regional parties, with all that would entail for the balkanization of the nation's politics.moreover, if the nation enjoyed the spectacle of the 2000 election, it should be prepared. in that year, the fight was over florida's electoral votes which confined the battle - as a legal and political matter - to the vote in one or two counties in that state. turn the battle into a nationwide popular vote and instantly the fight would move to the count in every close vote in every closely fought district across the country.there is irony in this. 2000 was effectively resolved by a ruling in the supreme court - that bastion of elitist judges and lawyers. abolish the electoral college and close votes across the country will invariably end up in the courts as a routine matter.the electoral college has served the nation well for over 200 years and such long established institutions deserve deference. their endurance certainly suggesting that they have worked as well as anything works in an imperfect world.wise societies realize that. which certainly suggests something about the state of american society. people do vote, regardless if they cast a ballot. silence can be thought of as a vote. the reason i say this is that i chose not to vote out of no confidence for the ballot. i would either have voted for something in which i did not believe, or i couldn't "thrown away" with a 3rd party vote, in which i still didn't believe.there is no write in option for "no confidence," and interestingly, if enough people voted this way, the way american voting works, would require either the candidates to all be thrown out, and a new set of candidates, or the government would make their own choice, at which point democracy would be dead. if we look at voting in this manner, it most certainly is compulsory. however, america has an odd obsession of thinking that the common man's vote for president actually matters. local votes will influence politics for a person far more than a presidential vote ever will. this is why many localities have gerrymandering, in order to control the constituency and votes.i personally do not believe my vote will ever make a difference, as it never has in any political election. besides, perpetuating the idea that the common man isn't controlled by our plutocratic corporatist "democracy" is silly, but people will keep on voting and believing that they matter, or are heard. perhaps my view is cynical and pessimistic. i see no reason to change it.c'est la vie. be president