The Constitution does not say that you can't be scanned by an X-ray.
Well of course not, there was no such thing but we have the freedom of privacy.
Thomas Hobbes said the government needs to be like a Kraken, doing whatever it takes to keep its people safe. While I think that people do need to have their privacy, there are some things like airport scans that are necessary to keep people safe.
Post by The_LEGO_Nerd on Mar 23, 2017 23:16:54 GMT
I completely agree. Respresentational Democracy does not work in my opinion; I much prefer the idea of Direct Democracy. I live in the hope that one day, some one will work out a way to implement Direct Democracy across the globe.
Australia has a direct democracy, though I don't think that is what you meant by the phrase. It basically means we are low-key involved in every decision made through compulsory election and referendum voting. According to scholars, this equates to a direct democracy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. The name implies more than what it really is, as does true democracy... Which again, is something else entirely. I understand what you mean though.
You would like to see everyone voting on referendums and plebiscites for every new proposed law. Though not impossible, it would be incredibly expensive in both dollars and loss of liberties. Something like this would need to be done via the internet and building that would be a massive task. Australia attempted to do last year's census online, it failed for obvious reasons. You can look it up if you're interested. "Australian online census fail" should do the trick.
So, you'd not only need to create a safe and secure website that didn't crash when everyone was voting, but you'd also need to give everyone access to a computer and the internet. That equals dollars. As for the loss of liberty, I don't see how you could have compulsory home voting while remaining anonymous. Democracy doesn't really work as it should if you're not anonymous. And as a liberal democracy, that's a bad thing.
I'm not sure if you guys have a different meaning for the term republic, but it's generally considered as a nation with a full bill of rights. <- Something Australia does not have. As well as having a separation of powers. <- Something which Australia kind of has.
There are countries like Australia and Switzerland that come really close to being an absolute democracy but are still classified as republics, because they have elected officials who make a lot of the decisions.
Post by The_LEGO_Nerd on Mar 23, 2017 23:24:32 GMT
Most of the world has free speech ya know.
Here, let me bold the part you didn't see.
There are some countries like Japan and Germany that have been democracy-fied by the US, but a lot of countries have had free speech long before. Britain's had it since 1689; France has had it since 1789.
It might've worked in most cases but not all, I know the Republicans want Smaller Government but that's not always true, they want a large Military. They want no Restrictions which would mean we would have some huge tycoons who destroy small business and we would be far worse, Thankfully they haven't been able to get rid of the Great Society. But the Democrats aren't any better, they have a lot of Garbage also, both are flawed.
Vote Libertarian.
Isn't that the party whose candidate didn't know what Aleppo is?
Welcome, then, to our little club. Bobbywan, at your service. *I doff my imaginary hat*. :tounge:
Now then, what area of history are you studying? Perhaps we can be of assistance. :tounge:
Thanks. *Moves head closer to the screen* Wait a sec, how did you get different tongue smileys?
I just finished reading about Woodrow Wilson and World War I and now I'm doing a test for it. That's very kind of you to offer assistance, but I'm pretty sure my school will bleach all of my clothes until they're thoroughly pink if I receive any kind of unauthorized help while doing tests.
They're right there in the emotes selection bar, you just have to look farther down towards the bottom. :tounge:
So, here's an interesting topic: the French Revolution.
Or, more specifically, how while people talk a lot about the French Revolution, and while it was undoubtedly very influential, it failed. By definition, it failed. It led to a reign of terror, and and then 10 years
later Napoleon declared himself Emperor, and then France had another Monarchy, which grew more Constitutional over the course of several revolutions, until the second Republic was established, for a few
years until Napoleon the III established the Empire, until finally in 1870 they established a Republic again and finally stuck with it. Until WWII, and Vichy France, and then the fourth and fifth republics since
then, though you can't blame France for the Germans overthrowing their government.
In the time period that the Unit ed States has had one government, France has had.......eleven. And that's not counting Napoleon coming back for Waterloo.
There are some countries like Japan and Germany that have been democracy-fied by the US, but a lot of countries have had free speech long before. Britain's had it since 1689; France has had it since 1789.
And in 1789 in France you could get beheaded for saying anything against the revolutionary government, Actually, you didn't have to say anything, you could just be accused, and then told you had to prove your own innocence. That's how a lot of people got murdered. So, they really didn't have free speech.
I had doubts about joining this place, but I'm a little behind in History in school so I'm running it like a marathon. So far I've almost finished the 3rd quarter of my History in 3 weeks, at this rate I'll finish it into oblivion or however that goes.
So, here's an interesting topic: the French Revolution.
Or, more specifically, how while people talk a lot about the French Revolution, and while it was undoubtedly very influential, it failed. By definition, it failed. It led to a reign of terror, and and then 10 years
later Napoleon declared himself Emperor, and then France had another Monarchy, which grew more Constitutional over the course of several revolutions, until the second Republic was established, for a few
years until Napoleon the III established the Empire, until finally in 1870 they established a Republic again and finally stuck with it. Until WWII, and Vichy France, and then the fourth and fifth republics since
then, though you can't blame France for the Germans overthrowing their government.
In the time period that the Unit ed States has had one government, France has had.......eleven. And that's not counting Napoleon coming back for Waterloo.
So, what do other people think?
Yep, the French Revolution was a really interesting thing in history. It was all really fast-paced, with everything going to at once.
There are some countries like Japan and Germany that have been democracy-fied by the US, but a lot of countries have had free speech long before. Britain's had it since 1689; France has had it since 1789.
And in 1789 in France you could get beheaded for saying anything against the revolutionary government, Actually, you didn't have to say anything, you could just be accused, and then told you had to prove your own innocence. That's how a lot of people got murdered. So, they really didn't have free speech.
That is true, but that's why the French Revolution happened.
Australia has a direct democracy, though I don't think that is what you meant by the phrase. It basically means we are low-key involved in every decision made through compulsory election and referendum voting. According to scholars, this equates to a direct democracy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. The name implies more than what it really is, as does true democracy... Which again, is something else entirely. I understand what you mean though.
You would like to see everyone voting on referendums and plebiscites for every new proposed law. Though not impossible, it would be incredibly expensive in both dollars and loss of liberties. Something like this would need to be done via the internet and building that would be a massive task. Australia attempted to do last year's census online, it failed for obvious reasons. You can look it up if you're interested. "Australian online census fail" should do the trick.
So, you'd not only need to create a safe and secure website that didn't crash when everyone was voting, but you'd also need to give everyone access to a computer and the internet. That equals dollars. As for the loss of liberty, I don't see how you could have compulsory home voting while remaining anonymous. Democracy doesn't really work as it should if you're not anonymous. And as a liberal democracy, that's a bad thing.
I'm not sure if you guys have a different meaning for the term republic, but it's generally considered as a nation with a full bill of rights. <- Something Australia does not have. As well as having a separation of powers. <- Something which Australia kind of has.
There are countries like Australia and Switzerland that come really close to being an absolute democracy but are still classified as republics, because they have elected officials who make a lot of the decisions.
Australia isn't a republic though. The Monarch remains the Head of State with the Governor-General representing Her Majesty. We continue to vote down the Republican Movement. The Australians of '99 did not want a House elected President. New Zealand is also very similar in that respect. Switzerland, however, is a republic.
