Totalitarianism vs some semblance of democracy?

[MH1]

Just wondering where DUers stand on this question these days. It's hard to believe it even needs to be asked, but seeing some of the posts here lately just has me wondering.

Edit to clarify - the question is, which is preferable as a form of government?
Edit 2 to add the third option for those who think it's needed.

[NightWatcher]

1. are you asking which we prefer, or which we currently live under?

I think we are living under a Totalitarian Government, but I'd prefer a tribal based Anarchy where we rule ourselves

[MH1]

3. Which one is a preferable form of government.

Just curious, have you spent much time in other countries, where the government may or may not be called "democracy" but anyway operates much differently than ours?

[NightWatcher]

7. "Democracy= 2 wolves and 1 lamb voting on what to have for lunch."

Franklin said that

I like the idea of a representative republic, but we have faltered in the execution of the grand experiment

[Tyler Durden]

2. You need a "What difference does it make, anyway?" choice.

[MH1]

4. Added. In slightly different words. nt

[Tyler Durden]

5. Works for me Comrade.

I'm pretty disillusioned with the whole mess right about now. If I were at home, I'd be playing "The Internationale" to cheer myself up.

[MH1]

6. Just curious

Have you spent much time in many other countries besides the US?

I was in the military and served in many locations and observed many different versions of "democracy". I haven't had the luck(?) to spend any time in totalitarian countries but what I have heard and read from those who have make me feel that it must make all our complaints pale in comparison.

Kind of like the difference between being "dirt poor" with a roof over your head and somehow managing to keep the creditors at bay each month, vs. being totally homeless and destitute (and maybe brown skinned too). In other words, a world of difference.

Of course, as the saying goes, in a democracy the people get the government they deserve.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Which is what we, the Russsians, and the Georigians have. The governement they deserve.

All three being pseudo democracies.

[Tyler Durden]

11. Just Mexico and Canada, I'm afraid....

Unless you count Texas (LOTS of 3rd world areas in HOUSTON) or being homeless for a while. Sort of gives me some perspective.

[DailyGrind51]

8. We have an oligarchy of multinational corporations and wealthy special interest groups.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil;

"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine

And, in any form can become, and frequently is, intolerable.

[SOS]

12. Last Fall

peacefully protesting civil servants, who had been fired by Saakashvili, were smashed by riot police.
Not much of a democracy.

[Larry Ogg]

13. On this question, I find myself believing with what Gandhi said, “Democracy would be a good idea”.

With that said, I believe there is sufficient criteria in which one can measure totalitarianism and democracy, but I am not the one who gets to set the bar; as we should well know, that responsibility too often ends up in the hands of pathological deviants that are anything but democratic, for instance the unelected occupants of the White House, their bipartisan congressional enablers and the predecessors that paved the way for their rise to power.

Second of all, If I asked the question, which is preferable, a tiny bit of freedom or no freedom at all? Of course the answer is so obvious that it is pointless and most people who are not confronted with that choice might not take me to serious. But don’t get me wrong, I think your poll does address an important question, is there an acceptable lowest possible denominator in which totalitarian regimes should be able to call themselves a Democracy? Although that was not the question and there is no selection that I could possibly choose from because I believe that totalitarianism and democracy are two different ideals, represented by totally different types of characters, i.e. psychopathic villains and clueless honest people. So at what point does this type of merger cease to be acceptable, who benefits and who gets hurt.

I am of the opinion that the bad guys be exposed for what they are, and if your not a republican and you want your neighbors to know that Joe Blow who lives down the street is thief, then you wont try to convince them that Joe is now an honest man because this weeks loot is equal to only half of that from the week before. In other words don’t fall in a trap by letting a totalitarian regime call itself a democracy when they are not, it only lowers the bar for those that are, and that we could say is the goal of totalitarians.

[porphyrian]

14. No form of government is inherently better. It depends on the people and the leadership.

For example, there are a number of American Christians who would love to live in a totalitarian country ruled by Jesus, if that were possible. Likewise, American "Democracy" has been reduced to choosing one of two people who were essentially chosen for you, then living with whatever they decide to do for four years - hardly what the Greeks field tested millennia ago (and, yes, I know we are a republic).

Ideally, I'd like to have a government that is involved enough to protect the people but is dedicated to protecting the rights and liberties of the individual. Something like what America is sold as but isn't, except in comparison to even worse situations elsewhere. Apparently, our government can only protect one group of people at a time and right now it's favored people are corporations.