Quote:
Originally Posted by nhvoter
I think what you mean is that not enough people choose to offer their brains to the loudmouths and the pundits. Unfortunately there is a culture of narcissism that is being bred through non-direct forms of communication - through music, movies, and the internet when it comes to politics. Because this approach requires less citation of facts, less requirement of common sense and a user unlimited time to answer a question and do not require discussion of two or more sides i'm pretty much convinced based on comparing the cyber world to the real world that the former is responsible for the political lunacy in the latter.
|
Sounds like a consumer society to me.....
Quote:
|
Again, this is arrogant. You're assuming that everyone you see shopping at Wal-Mart and a kid with them doesn't have strong political views. Unless you've talked to everyone, I suggest you shut up.
|
Again, not what i said. They may have the strongest of political views, but in the end it does not seem translate into political participation. At best it translates into cynicism or just a feeling of helplessness. And whe you have the opiate of an endless and always in your face consumer culture - why bother... And no, i won't shut up.
Quote:
|
People here don't participate? You mean over 100 million people going to the polls isn't participation? You mean political books often being at #1 on the bestsellers isn't participation? You mean asking candidates questions isn't participation? You mean making movies about why you think the president sucks isn't participation?
|
I said there was a lack of participation, given the size, the education, and the power of a generally free society to effect change. There is what is commonly referred to as a democratic deficit. Leaders are not trusted, in fact they are mostly despised and viewed as scum. what concerns people in polls is not reflected in what the debate is centered around. And the system is really only open to the elite of society. Bush, then Clinton, then Bush, then Clinton..... and so on. Its starting to resemble the mafia. Its pathetic.
Quote:
|
Get over it, not everybody agrees with you and this fact doesn't mean they're 'not participating.' I'm really sick and tired of this political culture in this country that thinks the media is biased if it doesn't agree with them, the intelligence is flawed or 'propaganda' if it leads to a conclusion they fear, and that people are 'ignorant' and 'blind' if they don't agree with them. We will pay dearly for this behavior and part of having a functional democracy is the ability to debate, not call people names. So, you really are part of the problem, not part of the solution like you might think.
|
Wow, i can see i touched a nerve. I said there is a serious lack of political participation in this culture (and there is), and my argument is that this is because we are mainly consumers, not citizens. (which seems true to me).
Your rant does not really touch on those issues. You seem to be in a bit of denial..... accusing me of name calling.. WTF... get a grip man.
Quote:
|
I don't think so when you consider the fact that youth groups are the new way that tyrants consolidate power in 'dictatorships-turned-electoral democracies.' Look at Nashi in Russia or the Bolivarian circles in Venezuela, voter intimidation through violence is outrageous.
|
Like i said, ridiculous. Chavez lost the election, it was fair, and he accepted defeat. There is not much more to read into it except he overestimated his popularity, and he underestimated the power of student groups (youth groups) to counter his campaign. That is democracy, and it worked. The most significant act of political violence in modern history in Venezuela was initiated by the opposition.
Andrew