You’re only able to choose two options, how is that democracy? I thought democracy was about being able to choose anyone you think is suitable to be a leader, not one of two pre-selected people. At that point, it’s not much different to a one-party system, just with two people rather than only one person.

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    That’s not what democracy is.

    Democracy is simply a system of government where leaders are voted on instead of inheriting their title or gaining it through physical force and coercion.

    The original form of democracy had slavery, and excluded women and non-land owners, the word simply distinguishes which mechanism brings someone to power, it doesn’t inherently imply fairness or free choice.

      • jimmy90@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        that’s why in many european states we’ve evolved to variants of multi party, transferable votes systems

        it still has inherent flaws and it still seems to have 2 sides (one side kinda sorta has to be the majority “in power”, and the others in opposition) but it feels and maybe is more representative of the vote we cast

        • sbird@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          maybe it’s due to the inherent human“us vs them” mentality. the “us vs them” thing really causes a lot of problems :<

          • jimmy90@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Not so sure about that. It’s adversarial in nature but that’s not a bad thing. It means we keep changing hopefully for the better for everyone