Not impressed at all, since it does not point out that democracy only was made in order to create a group of intellectual decision making for strictly the local society. Such as a town or chiefdom of 2000 people. In for example ancient Greece and in the early viking age Norway. This was somewhat functional or more, depending on the quality or situational context of the region's leaders and culture. Mostly this true democracy was removed by a combination of religious expansionists and inflation oriented economy by nobilities. Later democracy has turned into just the random outcome of votes from easily manipulated masses. Already Jefferson and even long before Socrates predicted this problem to appear in human culture and thus warned against it, however overestimating their hopes that the majority of the public would be more intellectually able from education. Which simply does not happen. The intellect and good morals are always only present in an intellectual minority. Democracy is correctly called the tyranny of a majority. It conflicts directly against liberty ,which is in principle a functional and responsible state of progress through freedom, science, economy and effective welfare.
A very advisable history and economy book to read is Fraudcoin ,by Rune Østgård. (Ø/ö = like the vowel in english "blur" or "first". Å= like the vowel in english "raw" or "fork")
Democracy is a piece of crap, designed to give you the illusion of choice. The only choices you really have are plastic or paper, democrat or republican. You have owners, they own you and will continue to manipulate you by telling you whatever it is you want to hear. Commercials tell us what love is, right? Love is what makes a Subaru a Subaru. You might not think that will ever infect your mind and if that's the case, then it already has.
Selen Ni More like you're a MORON who can't understand anything more complex than a dumb cartoon with simplistic dumbing-down and stupid visuals. Commence butthurting.
bro this channel took the sharpest turn in terms of content first they were teaching children about democracy and stuff and now it’s *I just want to take over the world, IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?*
This is what I learned in school we use the representative democracy in Canada. This type of democracy was use by the Iroquois Confederacy. But we have in Canada is three levels of government and each level has a responsibility and representatives to represent us like mayors, reeves,chiefs,Prime Minister, MLAs,and premier.
Which always leads to decay and in some cases even to a totalitarian and culturally/financially stagnative nation. Elections are just a fancification of coup d'etat by special-interest lobby groups from religion or financial gangster lobbies or political extremism. Often a mix. Often turning into imperialist federations. The perhaps least democratic but most functional and free society today is Liechtenstein. That is, it is the most democratic in terms of the early meaning of the word combined with liberty and progress values.
USA and its so-called partners, self-proclaimed democracies, actually use the slogan of democracy to carry out dictatorship throughout the world. Any country different from it must be subverted, like a pagan. This level seems to stay in the Middle Ages, fortunately people all over the world today have known it very clearly.
J. Lee not « every country that’s different ». Just « any country that’s actively oppressing it’s people or restricting its freedom beyond what’s strictly necessary », if we’re talking about cases where ideology was the reason for subverting a government. Which... yeah, I’d say that’s a pretty legitimate reason to oppose a foreign government. And if we were still stuck in the Middle Ages, in terms of mentality... well, first of all you can be sure that no flag with a crescent on it would flew over any country from east Northern Africa to Pakistan, and secondly we’d send armies, not ambassadors, when trying to convince other people from messing around. We do send armies, of course, but comparatively to the number of ambassadors sent, the number of western military expedition are relatively few.
I love such videos. They are fun to watch, and visualizations make them even more understandable and easy to follow! The reference to Game of Thrones made sense in the context. I never thought about that in that particular way. XD
The flaw in democracy is when it includes everyone, not when it excludes some, because democracy in reality/practice is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority.
Democracy is anybody who deviates away from the official narrative will get silenced. Don’t take my word for it don’t look for a reply my accounts probably been deleted already by RUclips admin
The division of power into 3 independent branches is the US implimenrtation of governence and is not an inherent feature of domocracy. This isn't the only model or the best, as we often see how partisan politics in the legilative branch criples working of the executive branch or how a different administration following a general election will undo or dismantle all that was worked on and achieved in the previous administration. In the UK for example following a general election, the party that gained majority forms the government (excutive branch) and the party leader becomes the Prime Minister so government ministers are Members of the Parliament, (legistative branch) in the first place. Under this model the government is answerable to the Parliament. In fact there is at least one official weekly session where the Members of Parliament get to ask the Prime Minister questions on wide topics of the day, policies and workings of the government and to hold the government to account for its actions (or inactions). When a new party comes into power following a general election, all undertakings of the previous government is honoured; any changes or deviation requires another act of Parliament.
The United States of a America is not a Democracy for which it stands… “A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting that vote.” - Ben Franklin That is why as American citizens, we “pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” It’s imperative we realize the difference.
James Madison Federalist No. 10 - 1787 Category: Democracy [D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Fisher Ames speech in the Massachusetts Ratifying Convention - 1788 Category: Democracy The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty. John Adams letter to John Taylor - 1814 Category: Democracy Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. John Adams An Essay on Man's Lust for Power - 1763 Category: Democracy [D]emocracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few they compared it to two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner etc. we have a constitutional republic established by people who despised democracy and Athens failed because of democracy. stop lying to people dick.
"A political creed claiming to defend freedom of choice, democracy ascended not because of universal popularity, but through overwhelming economic and military force." - Richard Tedor, "Hitler's Revolution" (2013), pg. 5
As a Greek who studies Aristotle I can say that the so called "modern democracy" is nothing more than a monarchy that subjects have the right to vote for a person that will decide for the laws of the society even if the majority of people disagrees with his decisions . The term indirect democracy is the greatest scam against humanity. Actually in democracy there are no rights but only freedom. Citizens in democracy do not ask for rights because they have political freedom, they are autonomus, nobody rules them. This is exactly the purpose of democracy, the freedom of the citizens' society.
And COMPLETE BULLSHIT. The Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT. From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions: *Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.* And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions: *the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….* *The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….* *However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.* These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
Imperial Democracy and direct democracy often mesh with each other to produce this one result;dictatorship by a ruling class. Imperial Democracy lends itself to laws that are too numerous, lengthy, and complicated. direct democracy lends itself to laws that are too much based on reckless generalizations and simplistic assumptions. The law is too important to be left to "lawyers"! I have stated that in written letters for nearly 30 years. However, only in the last year and a half did I realize that the law should not be left to the "common man". The "common man",while entitled to rights that the Bill of Rights state he or she is entitled to, should not be allowed to vote for candidates for public office en masse. They simply do not have the maturity, the objectivity, the sophistication, the scope, the reasoning ability, nor a basic understanding of proper governance to make a sound choice for a candidate for public office. The "common man" are too often plagued with passions and prejudices and therefore cannot evaluate matters based on pure merit. While obviously poll taxes and competency tests that restrict people from voting should not be allowed because those restrictions promote the highly flawed model of Imperial Democracy, there is only one effective and principled way to implement a proper filtration system. That is public balloting. The people who care about the political process and the general welfare will much more likely embrace the burden of disclosure in order to support transparent governance. This is what the Founding Fathers wanted. We The People should honor their desires.
A great and very informative video! I don't know why you mention in 1:08 a constitution, though. In the UK there is no such document in the written form and there wasn’t anything resembling one at the time of Magna Carta.
"This state came into being, and all states come into being through overcoming interests of pure personal will and individual selfishness. Democracy steers recklessly toward placing the individual in the center of everything. In the long run it is impossible to escape the crisis such a conflict will produce." - Adolf Hitler in a April 1939 address
Casteism in the Indian Constitution (Article 55(2)): Unfortunately, casteism based on the size of population of a state has been subtley incorporated into the Republic of India by the Indian Constitution by the members of the constituent assembly through Article 55(2). Every Indian has the equal right to vote, but the important question is whether the value of each vote of an Indian is equal? Tragically, the value of each vote of an Indian is not equal according to Article 55(2) of the Indian Constitution. According to Article 55(2), the value of the vote of a state with more population in the Republic of India has more value and the value of the vote of a state with less population in the Republic of India has less value. Furthermore, a more populous state of the Republic of India has more number of MPs than a state with less population. Therefore, people from the most populous state of Uttar Pradesh of the Republic of India are the first class citizens of the Republic of India; next, the people from the second most populous state of Maharastra are the second class citizens of India, then the people from Madhya Pradesh are the third class citizens of India and so forth. People from the least populous state of Sikkim of India are the last class of citizens of India; next, the people of Mizoram are the next last class citizens of India. Since India has 36 states and union territories, our class of Indian citizenship is in the range 1 to 36. This casteism in Indian constitution can be eradicated only if the number and value of MPs of each state of Indian Republic is not based on population. Based on the principles of Human Rights, the number and value of MPs of each state of Indian Republic should just be equal; this can be accomplished through amendment by parliament. Casteism in Indian constitution is the root cause of all the problems in India. We want azadi from the casteism in Indian constitution.
one thing i know about democracy . it never fits in the Third world, and as Alaadin said 'the people of Wadeya love being opressed' : ) Greetings from Algeria
hans blixxx No, that's TOTALITARIAN democracy. Under true democracy, the people only own the state-- they don't own the People, who have inalienable rights and freedoms. Remind us again what "freedoms" people have when they're drafted? Or taxed of their private wealth? Yeah... didn't think so. And COMPLETE BULLSHIT. The Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT. From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions: *Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.* And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions: *the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….* *The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….* *However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.* These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
Democracy is nothing more than a nine letter word much like the words oligarchy; or commodity; and if you ain't got that "doe ray me"; you will never be able to afford it! In actual fact it is nothing more than an idea; or a "theory" that has yet to come to actual fruition. And those who rule the world know it; and will make damn good and sure that it never does! See: "A Noble Lie"-Plato
A true democracy is one where all its citizens vote. The reason democracy in the US is not functioning at its best is because people dont vote, and those who do are generally uneducated, ultimately making the US an oligarchy. Another big contributing factor is that of money. The corruption and red tape is obvious.
the.conservative,timelord: Actually, the people that don't vote are the smart ones, whether they know it or not, they are making a pretty good and practical decision. From the moment that slaveholders acquired the votes (in the Constitution) of the slaves they owned, our "democracy" became largely a fig leaf for profiteers. If voting mattered enough to really move policy, it wouldnt be allowed. It matters just enough that the 2 parties are making it more difficult to vote in their system. They own the voting system, the debate system, and the machines that count the votes. This, in part, explains why the Execs at Wells Fargo will not be facing jail after creating 2 million false bank accounts and credit cards. Money rules, Americans don't rule. Only a protest vote really matters, otherwise your better off to save your energy and organize resistance rather than participate in a fraud.
the.conservative.timelord "A true democracy is one where all its citizens vote." Vote for what? Grits or chitlins? Even SLAVES got to choose that, so by your definition they were "democratic." A true democracy is one where citizens CONSENT TO THEIR GOVERNMENT-- which Americans do NOT, because we are SLAVES to TOTALITARIAN democracy, which was created by mass-murder and censorship during the Lincoln Administration, to SUPPRESS the fact that the Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT. From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions: *Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.* And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions: *the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….* *The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….* *However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.* These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
Dhi Mancini: You've probably noticed that the two corporate parties run the debates, the polls, get free access to corporate media, and choose candidates in such a way that we never have an opportunity to vote against all the wars, energy policy, banking, arms sales, etc......... We DO get a regular opportunity to vote for people who start wars, do nothing to stem fossil fuel economics, let 10 Americans be evicted while giving trillions to the bankers that evict them, etc.............. Voting so rarely presents viable survivable alternatives that those who don't vote make more sense than those who do. To a large extent voting has become a stamp of approval on our steady destruction. If you don't see an alternative to the destruction of the planet on your ballot, don't vote! We can't go on voting if it just encourages more of what we already suffer from.
@Random Content Without knowing what country you live in it's hard to say when the right wing governments taking power all over the world will get to your region. Chances are their already there. If not, the whole banking, oil, climate change, and food system is pretty universal anyway. Whether or not your countrymen submit to gun culture is maybe a a few incidents away, if fear takes hold and if the law and order crowd gets the media coverage in response to the fear. The trick is to work to build another world, a democratic world, without corporate dominance. America is the same America that killed off the Indians and invaded 50-60 countries from the late 1800's to today. There have been times (the 30's and 60's) when we showed rationality, but that's not nature of American leadership over the long haul. Trump is a new low, but nothing like the Confederacy. I don't think there's any place on the planet that a way off of the path we're on. Creating democracy is the only alternate path and you see it fighting for space from Tienamen, Arab Spring, Occupy Wall St, and especially in the budding "socialist" movement fighting for a chance in America.
This is sensational content. A similar book I read was a sensation in its own right. "The Art of Meaningful Relationships in the 21st Century" by Leo Flint
I came for the short explanation, and I was unexpectedly very impressed with the presentation. great video
Not impressed at all, since it does not point out that democracy only was made in order to create a group of intellectual decision making for strictly the local society. Such as a town or chiefdom of 2000 people. In for example ancient Greece and in the early viking age Norway. This was somewhat functional or more, depending on the quality or situational context of the region's leaders and culture. Mostly this true democracy was removed by a combination of religious expansionists and inflation oriented economy by nobilities. Later democracy has turned into just the random outcome of votes from easily manipulated masses. Already Jefferson and even long before Socrates predicted this problem to appear in human culture and thus warned against it, however overestimating their hopes that the majority of the public would be more intellectually able from education. Which simply does not happen. The intellect and good morals are always only present in an intellectual minority. Democracy is correctly called the tyranny of a majority. It conflicts directly against liberty ,which is in principle a functional and responsible state of progress through freedom, science, economy and effective welfare.
A very advisable history and economy book to read is Fraudcoin ,by Rune Østgård. (Ø/ö = like the vowel in english "blur" or "first". Å= like the vowel in english "raw" or "fork")
😅😅😅😅😅
Do you think I should shave my butthole w hair creams?
@@jessicavanessa3830 LMFAO WHAT?
lets not forget the amazing drawing and time he gave to the art.
I know right
It is not his drawing
It can be made by apps within minutes
back when minute videos was educational....
Look at his channel now
I agree
Who’s here from an online assignment 😂
me
ey
me
Me
me
I love this video so much. I'm more of a visual learner.
Democracy is a piece of crap, designed to give you the illusion of choice. The only choices you really have are plastic or paper, democrat or republican. You have owners, they own you and will continue to manipulate you by telling you whatever it is you want to hear. Commercials tell us what love is, right? Love is what makes a Subaru a Subaru. You might not think that will ever infect your mind and if that's the case, then it already has.
Selene Ni me toooo
If everyone voted 1 + 1 = 3 it does not mean 1 + 1 = 3. In fact, the majority will always do that because they are generally inferior.
Democracy is flawed.
Selen Ni More like you're a MORON who can't understand anything more complex than a dumb cartoon with simplistic dumbing-down and stupid visuals.
Commence butthurting.
bro this channel took the sharpest turn in terms of content first they were teaching children about democracy and stuff and now it’s *I just want to take over the world, IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?*
If more people understood the word democracy before throwing it around, the world would be a little better!
Not what Socrates thinks gurl
Yeah thats called etymology.
I'm going to a completion for UIL social studies and I'm going to nail it thanks to this vid
please like this comment if you think i will pass it
This is what I learned in school we use the representative democracy in Canada. This type of democracy was use by the Iroquois Confederacy.
But we have in Canada is three levels of government and each level has a responsibility and representatives to represent us like mayors, reeves,chiefs,Prime Minister, MLAs,and premier.
Canada is a fascist state.
thank you. i live in slovenia and i have a test about democracy tomorrow. this really helped me!
Same here good luck from Barbados
Would u please make some more videos , to introduce us about, communism, socialism, capitalism..... Thank u, the video was helpful thank u
Sadia jannatul ferdouse democracy is the most important tho
what's communism?
@@arrowhdar1574 my guy he said that 4 years ago i think he knows what they are now
THX SO MUCH THIS WAS WHAT I NEEDED FOR MY SOCIAL STUDIES GOVERNMENT PROJECT TYSM!!!
Oh yes I finally found the right video about democracy because we learning about it at school
ItsFoxyMc this video sugercoats everything
"I love democracy."
Me too
"I love Republic."
Same
Your here for Module, aren't ya?
Students nowadays are real LEGEND!
Thank you!
This helped understand my lesson alot!
Keep it up!
By the way,love your art!👍
Excellent summary. Well-written and illustrated.
Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people of it's own country.
Which always leads to decay and in some cases even to a totalitarian and culturally/financially stagnative nation. Elections are just a fancification of coup d'etat by special-interest lobby groups from religion or financial gangster lobbies or political extremism. Often a mix. Often turning into imperialist federations. The perhaps least democratic but most functional and free society today is Liechtenstein. That is, it is the most democratic in terms of the early meaning of the word combined with liberty and progress values.
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
- Winston Churchill
USA and its so-called partners, self-proclaimed democracies, actually use the slogan of democracy to carry out dictatorship throughout the world. Any country different from it must be subverted, like a pagan. This level seems to stay in the Middle Ages, fortunately people all over the world today have known it very clearly.
Constitutional Republic IS WHAT YOU MEAN.. The usa has never been a democracy.
“Democracy is the most vile form of government.”― James Madison
This is fun
Godd job
J. Lee not « every country that’s different ».
Just « any country that’s actively oppressing it’s people or restricting its freedom beyond what’s strictly necessary », if we’re talking about cases where ideology was the reason for subverting a government.
Which... yeah, I’d say that’s a pretty legitimate reason to oppose a foreign government. And if we were still stuck in the Middle Ages, in terms of mentality... well, first of all you can be sure that no flag with a crescent on it would flew over any country from east Northern Africa to Pakistan, and secondly we’d send armies, not ambassadors, when trying to convince other people from messing around.
We do send armies, of course, but comparatively to the number of ambassadors sent, the number of western military expedition are relatively few.
I love such videos. They are fun to watch, and visualizations make them even more understandable and easy to follow!
The reference to Game of Thrones made sense in the context. I never thought about that in that particular way. XD
The flaw in democracy is when it includes everyone, not when it excludes some, because democracy in reality/practice is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority.
A very good illustration
This video was recommended by my teacher 🤣to help us understand better 🤣
same lolll
Same lol 🤣🤣
Democracy is anybody who deviates away from the official narrative will get silenced.
Don’t take my word for it don’t look for a reply my accounts probably been deleted already by RUclips admin
The division of power into 3 independent branches is the US implimenrtation of governence and is not an inherent feature of domocracy. This isn't the only model or the best, as we often see how partisan politics in the legilative branch criples working of the executive branch or how a different administration following a general election will undo or dismantle all that was worked on and achieved in the previous administration.
In the UK for example following a general election, the party that gained majority forms the government (excutive branch) and the party leader becomes the Prime Minister so government ministers are Members of the Parliament, (legistative branch) in the first place. Under this model the government is answerable to the Parliament. In fact there is at least one official weekly session where the Members of Parliament get to ask the Prime Minister questions on wide topics of the day, policies and workings of the government and to hold the government to account for its actions (or inactions). When a new party comes into power following a general election, all undertakings of the previous government is honoured; any changes or deviation requires another act of Parliament.
The United States of a America is not a Democracy for which it stands…
“A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting that vote.” - Ben Franklin
That is why as American citizens, we “pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
It’s imperative we realize the difference.
usa is a democratic constitutional republic educate yourself ignorant american degenerate
Wow you make so good videos that children understand the concept very easily
James Madison
Federalist No. 10 - 1787
Category: Democracy
[D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
Fisher Ames
speech in the Massachusetts Ratifying Convention - 1788
Category: Democracy
The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.
John Adams
letter to John Taylor - 1814
Category: Democracy
Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.
John Adams
An Essay on Man's Lust for Power - 1763
Category: Democracy
[D]emocracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few
they compared it to two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner etc. we have a constitutional republic established by people who despised democracy and Athens failed because of democracy. stop lying to people dick.
"A political creed claiming to defend freedom of choice, democracy ascended not because of universal popularity, but through overwhelming economic and military force." - Richard Tedor, "Hitler's Revolution" (2013), pg. 5
this is an assignment that i am doing and this explains it so well
I saw this video on “Matéria de Capa” Program of TV Cultura, from Brazil
Great Video and Great Channel! - One more sub.
Drawing, wow!
Painting, wow!
Explanation, wow!
This channel, wow!!!
Good job this video helped me a lot because I have a huge test on this and I need the great to make it an A. Thanks
Suggestion: If you want to be top of the class watch educational videos instead of gaming.
i was going to watch it since the channel is called 'minutevideos', but then i saw that it is 3:09
As a Greek who studies Aristotle I can say that the so called "modern democracy" is nothing more than a monarchy that subjects have the right to vote for a person that will decide for the laws of the society even if the majority of people disagrees with his decisions . The term indirect democracy is the greatest scam against humanity. Actually in democracy there are no rights but only freedom. Citizens in democracy do not ask for rights because they have political freedom, they are autonomus, nobody rules them. This is exactly the purpose of democracy, the freedom of the citizens' society.
Indeed...!! Voters are ignorant, candidates are selfish; resultantly rule of minority over majority !
helped me a lot at school. thnx a lot for this vid. im a more visual learner so i like your drawings.
Best video explanation of democracy in short I like this video make more video
nice art work, it make it interesting. Good work
If anyone had to watch this video for a assignments your a G 👍👍👍
Nicely explained.
concept is clear sir💕💕💕💕💕💕💕💕
Am I the only one not here because of a school? I love to learn.
i am in school too in sauid
Easy teaching good teaching
1:08
ahhhh.... if only joffrey was able to follow the rules. but the drawing really shows what his real side is like
IM IN GRADE 3 WHO IS JOFFREY
AND IK I DONT NEED TO YELL
thank you so much! now i can pass my test! ❤
I came back to watch this video again ... All grade sixiers in Australia watched this video...
I never watched this fuk
same
awesome illustrations and good naration
I was wondering if majority of a populace votes to be ruled by a king and then his successors, does such a kingdom qualify to be called a democracy
you r an amazing artist with good explainer
omg very nice drawing and explanation ^^
+Van Tran Thanks :)
And COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
The Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT.
From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions:
*Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.*
And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions:
*the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….*
*The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….*
*However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.*
These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
i only have one question was he drawing or his friend
Nice video. Very helpful
Thank you so much!
Helped me with my essay.
Imperial Democracy and direct democracy often mesh with each other to produce this one result;dictatorship by a ruling class.
Imperial Democracy lends itself to laws that are too numerous, lengthy, and complicated. direct democracy lends itself to laws that are too much based on reckless generalizations and simplistic assumptions.
The law is too important to be left to "lawyers"! I have stated that in written letters for nearly 30 years. However, only in the last year and a half did I realize that the law should not be left to the "common man".
The "common man",while entitled to rights that the Bill of Rights state he or she is entitled to, should not be allowed to vote for candidates for public office en masse. They simply do not have the maturity, the objectivity, the sophistication, the scope, the reasoning ability, nor a basic understanding of proper governance to make a sound choice for a candidate for public office. The "common man" are too often plagued with passions and prejudices and therefore cannot evaluate matters based on pure merit.
While obviously poll taxes and competency tests that restrict people from voting should not be allowed because those restrictions promote the highly flawed model of Imperial Democracy, there is only one effective and principled way to implement a proper filtration system.
That is public balloting. The people who care about the political process and the general welfare will much more likely embrace the burden of disclosure in order to support transparent governance. This is what the Founding Fathers wanted. We The People should honor their desires.
Love the Game of Thrones reference! Also great video :D
Great video, I learned easy with drawings
A great and very informative video!
I don't know why you mention in 1:08 a constitution, though. In the UK there is no such document in the written form and there wasn’t anything resembling one at the time of Magna Carta.
"This state came into being, and all states come into being through overcoming interests of pure personal will and individual selfishness. Democracy steers recklessly toward placing the individual in the center of everything. In the long run it is impossible to escape the crisis such a conflict will produce." - Adolf Hitler in a April 1939 address
Casteism in the Indian Constitution (Article 55(2)): Unfortunately, casteism based on the size of population of a state has been subtley incorporated into the Republic of India by the Indian Constitution by the members of the constituent assembly through Article 55(2). Every Indian has the equal right to vote, but the important question is whether the value of each vote of an Indian is equal? Tragically, the value of each vote of an Indian is not equal according to Article 55(2) of the Indian Constitution. According to Article 55(2), the value of the vote of a state with more population in the Republic of India has more value and the value of the vote of a state with less population in the Republic of India has less value. Furthermore, a more populous state of the Republic of India has more number of MPs than a state with less population. Therefore, people from the most populous state of Uttar
Pradesh of the Republic of India are the first class citizens of the Republic of India; next, the people from the second most populous state of Maharastra are the second class citizens of India, then the people from Madhya Pradesh are the third class citizens of India and so forth. People from the least populous state of Sikkim of India are the last class of citizens of India; next, the people of Mizoram are the next last class citizens of India. Since India has 36 states and union territories, our class of Indian citizenship is in the range 1 to 36. This casteism in Indian constitution can be eradicated only if the number and value of MPs of each state of Indian Republic is not based on population. Based on the principles of Human Rights, the number and value of MPs of each state of Indian Republic should just be equal; this can be accomplished through amendment by parliament. Casteism in Indian constitution is the root cause of all the problems in India. We want azadi from the casteism in Indian constitution.
0:11 i call it ‘people power’
Very nice video. could you maby also make one of aristocracy.
Very nice but me have finished this topic in history but it did help thanks
Thanks for posting! ur video was so helpful for a whole class of students!
Very help for me
i love it such good drawings and good explanation
outstanding job
the fact that they drew this surprises me T^T
Thanks a lot . it's simple and easy to understand :-D
one thing i know about democracy . it never fits in the Third world, and as Alaadin said 'the people of Wadeya love being opressed' : ) Greetings from Algeria
Amazing, helped me a lot in the making of an essay! Thanks
ikr
I was sent here by my social studies teacher
Same bro
SWEET LIBERTY!!! RAHHHH
What an awesome and useful video. Great work.
wow what a good explanation and perfect drawing thnx
And very nice explanation
I don't think I know what you mean
Great video
I like this
good work by pascal gaggelli
Ambatipudi Krishnakumari We agree and love Pascal as well!!! What other topics do you think Pascal would cover well?
yeah
I like democracy as well
Who else is watching this video for online school ;)
Good to study easy
1:09 you can see games of thrones! =)
good video, it helped a lot! i'm visual learner
very helpful tanks
Democracy has its dangers. 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner....which this addressed but can't be overstated
hans blixxx No, that's TOTALITARIAN democracy.
Under true democracy, the people only own the state-- they don't own the People, who have inalienable rights and freedoms.
Remind us again what "freedoms" people have when they're drafted? Or taxed of their private wealth?
Yeah... didn't think so.
And COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
The Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT.
From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions:
*Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.*
And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions:
*the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….*
*The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….*
*However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.*
These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
This is helpful. Well done! Thank you.
Democracy is nothing more than a nine letter word much like the words oligarchy; or commodity; and if you ain't got that "doe ray me"; you will never be able to afford it! In actual fact it is nothing more than an idea; or a "theory" that has yet to come to actual fruition. And those who rule the world know it; and will make damn good and sure that it never does! See: "A Noble Lie"-Plato
A true democracy is one where all its citizens vote. The reason democracy in the US is not functioning at its best is because people dont vote, and those who do are generally uneducated, ultimately making the US an oligarchy. Another big contributing factor is that of money. The corruption and red tape is obvious.
the.conservative,timelord: Actually, the people that don't vote are the smart ones, whether they know it or not, they are making a pretty good and practical decision. From the moment that slaveholders acquired the votes (in the Constitution) of the slaves they owned, our "democracy" became largely a fig leaf for profiteers.
If voting mattered enough to really move policy, it wouldnt be allowed. It matters just enough that the 2 parties are making it more difficult to vote in their system. They own the voting system, the debate system, and the machines that count the votes. This, in part, explains why the Execs at Wells Fargo will not be facing jail after creating 2 million false bank accounts and credit cards. Money rules, Americans don't rule. Only a protest vote really matters, otherwise your better off to save your energy and organize resistance rather than participate in a fraud.
the.conservative.timelord "A true democracy is one where all its citizens vote."
Vote for what? Grits or chitlins? Even SLAVES got to choose that, so by your definition they were "democratic."
A true democracy is one where citizens CONSENT TO THEIR GOVERNMENT-- which Americans do NOT, because we are SLAVES to TOTALITARIAN democracy, which was created by mass-murder and censorship during the Lincoln Administration, to SUPPRESS the fact that the Constitution created a DIRECT democracy, when the People of each state OVERRULED their governments in order to place themselves in FINAL AUTHORITY. A direct democracy of SEPARATE NATIONS. And no, a direct democracy is not REQUIRED to have people voting on ALL laws; obviously they can APPOINT a republican form of government, but the People will simply be able to OVERRULE it. Like they DID, in 1787. But then, charlatans began re-writing history in order to claim what THIS video pimps-- i.e. that it was a TOTALITARIAN Democracy. This is the LIE which must be opposed. FACT.
From Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, writing in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions:
*Resolved_, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.*
And from James Madison, The Father of the Constitution, writing in the 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions:
*the term "states" … means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity…. because in that sense the Constitution was submitted to the "states;" in that sense the "states" ratified it; and in that sense of the term "states," they are consequently parties to the compact from which the powers of the federal government result….*
*The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition….*
*However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.*
These works simply observe the fact that each state was declared a separate nation-state unto itself in 1776, and did not surrender that status via the Constitution in 1787-9.
Dhi Mancini: You've probably noticed that the two corporate parties run the debates, the polls, get free access to corporate media, and choose candidates in such a way that we never have an opportunity to vote against all the wars, energy policy, banking, arms sales, etc.........
We DO get a regular opportunity to vote for people who start wars, do nothing to stem fossil fuel economics, let 10 Americans be evicted while giving trillions to the bankers that evict them, etc..............
Voting so rarely presents viable survivable alternatives that those who don't vote make more sense than those who do. To a large extent voting has become a stamp of approval on our steady destruction. If you don't see an alternative to the destruction of the planet on your ballot, don't vote! We can't go on voting if it just encourages more of what we already suffer from.
@Random Content Without knowing what country you live in it's hard to say when the right wing governments taking power all over the world will get to your region. Chances are their already there. If not, the whole banking, oil, climate change, and food system is pretty universal anyway. Whether or not your countrymen submit to gun culture is maybe a a few incidents away, if fear takes hold and if the law and order crowd gets the media coverage in response to the fear.
The trick is to work to build another world, a democratic world, without corporate dominance. America is the same America that killed off the Indians and invaded 50-60 countries from the late 1800's to today. There have been times (the 30's and 60's) when we showed rationality, but that's not nature of American leadership over the long haul. Trump is a new low, but nothing like the Confederacy.
I don't think there's any place on the planet that a way off of the path we're on. Creating democracy is the only alternate path and you see it fighting for space from Tienamen, Arab Spring, Occupy Wall St, and especially in the budding "socialist" movement fighting for a chance in America.
that was a good video
In this video we can understand what is democracy in few minutes 👍👍
kratos.....hmmm...which means......!!!!GOD OF WAR!!!!!
+Rajat cool hmm... Good point.
?
Rajat cool the greek gods of war are Ares of Mars and Athena or Minerva
@@cliocreaney9424 yes in real Greek mythology. But I was talking about games hehe
Democracy clearly has cracks. Monarchism (Or at least Constitutional Monarchism) clearly works better than "Democracy"
Nice
Nice na
Hiiiiii
Great content thanks
I'm still confused......am I this stupid xD
Maybe....XD
Jeremy Bayus 😂😭
No
Fantastic video and beautiful art.
Poop tastes nice, can anyone give me some poop. I play roblox and I have a gold fidget spinner. Pls help
You need a therapist because I think we found the Queen of cringe
This is sensational content. A similar book I read was a sensation in its own right. "The Art of Meaningful Relationships in the 21st Century" by Leo Flint
anyone here for homework?
I love democracy
I agree with that fat guy at the end of the video! :P
You taught very well, thanks a lot
👍😃👏
Not my favorite video
@kylie lit Hello to you to.
Thank you US is a greta democracy country
Thanks 👍😍👍👍