EPTNow I honestly do not think the United States favors the poor.
Just something to think about...
| Blogs > dhe95 |
|
dhe95
United States1213 Posts
Now I honestly do not think the United States favors the poor. | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
| ||
|
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
| ||
|
Rev0lution
United States1805 Posts
The closest to democracy is california's referendums and shit. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
| ||
|
Ingenol
United States1328 Posts
| ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
~Winston Churchill | ||
|
Insane Lane
United States397 Posts
| ||
|
Xenixx
United States499 Posts
| ||
|
Xela
Canada203 Posts
On May 28 2009 07:22 dhe95 wrote: I've been reading, and I came across the fact that Aristotle (Greek Philosopher) noticed that the governments ran by one person favored the rich, while the democracies favored the poor. Now I honestly do not think the United States favors the poor. So you just figured out a philosopher dead more than 2000 years ago was not 100% right about the political system of the USA? | ||
|
Gray[FH
152 Posts
On May 28 2009 07:32 Rev0lution wrote: The United States is a democratic replubic, there is a slight difference. The closest to democracy is california's referendums and shit. well put | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
- me | ||
|
geometryb
United States1249 Posts
i think it favors everyone. in a democracy, there is a lot done to appease the masses because of their voting power...but you still have to remember that its the wealthier people that are in office making laws or lobbying and putting ads on TV. | ||
|
geometryb
United States1249 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
Not anyone can run into congress and debate. We elect people to represent us. However, in order to be elected, you need to be able to run a campaign to get your name out there. In order to run a campaign, you need money. So from there...you can see how things might divert from Aristotle's view. In addition, when any government ages, the powers that be tend to get greedy in the sense that they want to consolidate and secure their power. This in part leads to the useless and dumb rhetoric and politics that plague our government's functioning today. | ||
|
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
| ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
Aristotle actually noted that there were six kinds of government: "good" monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, vs. "bad" monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. He defined them as being monarchy vs. tyranny, aristocracy vs. oligarchy, and democracy vs. anarchy. He noted that not that the poor are favored by democracy, but rather that the main benefitors are the hedonists, and how it's a counteraction to that of the arisocracy/oligarchy. For he noted that: ideally man was ruled by monarchy, but in the oligarchical state people became too obsessed with money instead of virtue. Democracy was the "oligarch's son" rebelling against the obsession of money, and instead of saving it begins to spend it. Tyranny results from the democrat's son becoming too hedonist. Thus, it's not that democracy favors poor people: it's that the focus of society changes from the hoarding of money to the fulfillment of everybody's wishes. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
(even if it's just a front) Honest question, cuz I don't know. | ||
|
29 fps
United States5725 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On May 28 2009 14:40 travis wrote: What government isn't essentially ran by one person? (even if it's just a front) Honest question, cuz I don't know. Speaking essentially, I'd argue the US is not run by one person, but by two entities...president and congress. There's an even enough power distribution that you can't say one has a significant amount more influence than the other. It may be a far cry from a true democracy in any sense of the word, but still. | ||
|
FieryBalrog
United States1381 Posts
Fodder for some really simplistic discussion IMO. "Better for the poor" is already a soundbite, and not a good one at that. Also lets just contrast the status of the poorer people in the US with similar populations run by "cult of personality" leaders. Mao, Lenin, Stalin spring to mind. It doesn't go well for the "cult of personality". | ||
| ||
