What's wrong with our country, and how're you gonna fix it?
POSTED BY: Cuda
UPDATED: Thursday, December 11, 2025 19:41
VIEWED: 28394
PAGE 1 of 12
Ok, it seems that many threads are morphing into political debate threads, negating their initial purpose, so, I thought I'd start a thread just for that purpose. Many people say they hate political debates, but I love 'em.
The subject of this thread isn't aimed at the United States specifically, it is simply a reference to how people like to spout off about problems without proposing any real solutions.
I was hoping that those outside the U.S. could let us know what country you are from. I always find it interesting how foreign nations view the U.S.
Also, I know people can get somewhat emotional at times, but lets try to keep things on a quality debate level. (Though I'm sure my sarcasm will get the best of me eventually 
)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Very interesting stuff. I have always been fascinated by how a political system shapes the number of parties in a country. If I'm not mistaken the American Constitution is one of the oldest democratic constitutions in the world (I'm not from the US), as such it is compared to most european constitutions a lot closer to monarchy (this is not a criticism, even dictatorship has it's advantages) in that the bulk of the power is unified in a single person (the president vs. the king). The US president as far as I'm aware only holds executive power, but so did the kings of england for several hundred years.
The main difference is of course that every four(?) years you get to vote which leader you want. Which would be great if it wouldn't be for the federal nature of the american state. To even make an impact on politics, a party has to actually win in a state. even if it gets 30% in all states, it doesn't really matter. (Please note that I am not very familiar with the american political system and could be 100% wrong about this, so please don't flame...)
In most countries in Europe we have parliamentarism (not in France though as far as I am aware). In that scenario you don't have the clear division between legislative and executive power, but the executive rely on the support of the parliament which the people elect, and hence the people have greater influence over who is actually in power. It also makes alliances between parties necessary (coalitions). In Sweden (where I live) their are seven distinct parties in parliament. The party in power (Social democrats) can currently not pass any laws on it's own, since it doesn't have enough members in parliament, instead it relies on the support of the Green Party and the Left Party to which it made concessions in order to ensure their support. In a system like this the voter has a lot more choice and people generally feel more interested in politics (just compare voter turnout for the last elections, Sweden: roughly 80%, USA: roughly 50%(?)). It might not surprise you to hear that the Swedish constitution in all it's simplicity and beauty (I am German so I'm actually not boasting) is from the '70s. The Swedes didn't change it for any apparent reason except because it was outdated. Maybe the US should consider the same thing and get over it's own fanaticism and tear up that piece of pergament. I am not saying start from scratch, I am saying take the things that are good (federalism, division of power, personality aspect) and shape them into something better.
And now the obvious question is: "What's all this got to do with Firefly?" and the answer is "zilch"(sp?), I hope you welcome me to this board anyway...
Coward
----------------
Wash: 'Yes... this is a fertile land, and we will thrive. We will rule over all this land, and we will call it... this land.' 'I think we should call it your grave.' 'Ah. Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal.' 'Hahaha. Mine is an evil laugh.'
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. - Thomas Paine
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Debates are ok, but people shouting rhetoric back and forth is kind of pointless.
What is wrong with our country (I assume you mean the United States)? It is the same thing that is wrong with every other nation, human nature. If people were good enough to create and operate a just and righteous government they wouldn't need one in the first place. For this reason, most governments start out with a system to balance the power and abuses that are inherent to its nature. Within mere minutes of signing and with the ink on the constitution still wet, individuals and groups begin plotting to exploit loopholes and accumulate power within the framework established.
What can be done? Personally, I think it all amounts to 
. Then again I am a depressed and jaded man 
.
Arawaen
Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Arawaen:
Debates are ok, but people shouting rhetoric back and forth is kind of pointless.
What is wrong with our country (I assume you mean the United States)? It is the same thing that is wrong with every other nation, human nature. If people were good enough to create and operate a just and righteous government they wouldn't need one in the first place. For this reason, most governments start out with a system to balance the power and abuses that are inherent to its nature. Within mere minutes of signing and with the ink on the constitution still wet, individuals and groups begin plotting to exploit loopholes and accumulate power within the framework established.
What can be done? Personally, I think it all amounts to
I agree w/ you on the point Arawaen that human nature is the main problem w/ our government. Politicians can not seem to understand the concept "by the people, and for the people". Too often, greed, paranoia, and ambition lead our elected officials to forget why they are in office, and they are too preoccupied w/ agendas of their own to fulfill their hollow campaign promises.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I vaguely recall Perot's family, or daughter, was threatened, and in light of the threat, Perot withdrew. I know he did get massive support from voters disgusted with the status quo.
How to fix the country? The biggest thing, as I see it, is to get more people to recognize the true state of the corruption. Once people realize that yes, our government is, and has been, lying to us, then perhaps some serious action may be undertaken. But even on these boards I've read the comments of those who totally believe that our government is truthful, and that no "conspiracies" exist. With so many folks' heads in the sand, it's tough to have meaningful discussions that anything is, in fact, wrong. If you don't believe something's busted, there's no need to fix it. Hence my call for getting people to turn off the TV news and start reading worldwide news reports on the Internet. This is something I've done for well over ten years now (at first with ancient Compuserve, in case anyone wonders), and my knowledge is vastly different from anyone who gets his "facts" from Dan Blather.
.......Ruxton
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think it's the increasing number of non-germane subjects on fan message boards. :)
As to how to fix it. Hrm. Haven't solved that one yet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're pretty close on the way the President is elected in the US. Our system runs so that the candidate that wins a State's election wins all of that State's electoral votes (predetermined based upon that state's population). So, if Florida has 10 electoral votes assigned to it, and more people in Florida vote for Bob than any other candidate, then Bob wins all 10 electoral votes. He doesn't even have to have a majority of the votes in that state, just more than any other candidate.
That isn't to say that you can have NO voice in the government unless you win a whole state. Much governing is done on the local level and you can only get elected to Congress as a Representative (one House of our Legislative Branch), with a local campaign. A candidate runs in a district (there are several districts in a State) and is sent to the Federal Legislature from that district. However, unless you are a part of a National Party, you are unlikely to be able to get the support from other Representatives to get anything done, and would then be unlikely to win re-election.
I can see why Parlimentary Democracy is so attractive in many ways. It gives a much broader range of choices as opposed to only two (perhaps three in rare occasions).
To me, however, the drawback is that it fosters what I would call "one-issue thinking" in the electorate. Let me make up an example based on a likely party if the US were to adopt Parlimentary Democracy.
If I am Pro-Lifer, I will vote the Pro-Life Party. Apart from strong ideas about abortion, the Pro-Life Party likely has no idea what to do in other areas, such as economics or national defense, if it should win. Likely, it will not win a majority and will have to ally with other parties whom hopefully fill in the gaps that Pro-Life has in its platform. These alliances take place after the vote has taken place. So, it is feasible for me, a Pro-Lifer, to have contributed to a government that is I may have strong moral objections to (for instance, the All-FOX-Reality-Show Party), if my Party Leaders feel that they need such a party to create a government.
I suppose Sweden is a good example of a smoothly running Parlimentary government. However, Italy also has a Parlimentary government, and when I was living there in 1989, the government had changed so often (lack-of-confidence votes, usually) that there had been more elections than years since WWII.
In the US Federal System, you only have (usually) two parties, but because of this, you generally have a good idea of what the party's platform is going to be if they are elected, BEFORE the votes are cast. It is possible (some would argue probable) that our candidates will misrepresent themselves, but then we should hold them accountable for that in the next election. If we fail to do that, then the fault lies with us.
Simon: I've never shot anyone before.
Book: I was there, son. I'm fair sure you haven't shot anyone yet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The fix is simple.
Drag all the lawyers out into the streets and shoot them.
You don't kill a weed by snipping it's leaves, you tear it out by the root.
It's not simpler than that.
-frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
How to fix the country? The biggest thing, as I see it, is to get more people to recognize the true state of the corruption. Once people realize that yes, our government is, and has been, lying to us, then perhaps some serious action may be undertaken. But even on these boards I've read the comments of those who totally believe that our government is truthful, and that no "conspiracies" exist. With so many folks' heads in the sand, it's tough to have meaningful discussions that anything is, in fact, wrong. If you don't believe something's busted, there's no need to fix it. Hence my call for getting people to turn off the TV news and start reading worldwide news reports on the Internet. This is something I've done for well over ten years now (at first with ancient Compuserve, in case anyone wonders), and my knowledge is vastly different from anyone who gets his "facts" from Dan Blather.
.......Ruxton
I agree that too many people are too wrapped up in their own lives, or in denial about the state of our country and government. There is corruption, misappropriation of funds, abuse of power, secret agendas, you name it and it is going on in Washington DC, and in state governments.
What to do about it? People need to educate themselves. They need to turn off the reality shows and start reading news on the net, and watch international news channels so they can get unfiltered news to get the whole story. They need to get involved in their community and local government. People need to above all else, vote. We need to put politicians and government on notice. We need to let them know that they work for us and that we will not sit idly by and let them do as they please. They are answerable to the people.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME