Japanese style democracy for Asia

[Götterdämmerung]

Meta-analytically, let’s refer to the PRD and PTPRD model. PRD or Pure representative democracy, PTPRD or pure two part form of representative democracy.

The goal of PTPD is also to have citizen preferences determine policy outcomes as in a direct democracy, but the process by which this determination takes place is quite different. Instead of the citizen choosing a person or party to represent her preferences in the legislative assembly where policies are decided, under PTPD the citizen effectively gets to choose the final set of policies herself. Each of the two parties competing in the election proposes a set of policies, which they promise to implement if they obtain a majority of seats in the parliament and the citizen votes for the party promising the most attractive set of policies. The party receiving the most votes in the election is awarded a majority of seats in the parliament and implements its promised platform. As under PRD, the entire nation should be treated as a single electoral district with seats in the parliament awarded in proportion to the votes won across the entire nation. But if parties are free to enter the competition for votes, how can one be sure that the voters have but two parties from which to choose? To ensure that this is the case, or at least that the winning party has obtained a majority of the votes cast and seats in parliament, PTPD requires that there be a second, run-off election between the two parties getting the most votes in the first election, should no party receive at least 50 percent of the votes in the first election. I’d say PTPD resembles the Westminster system.

In regards to PRD and PTPD, it is even more relevant to the set of democratic institutions operating in the European Union. Here is a mixed form of government, if there ever was one, which combines elements of federalism and a confederate form of government, geographic and proportional representation.


Reference:

Blankart, C. B., & Mueller, D. C. (2004). The advantage of pure forms of parliamentary democracy over mixed forms. Public Choice, 121(3/4), 431-453.

Still has nothing to do with democracy in it's true sense. What we have is a combination of ochlocracy and oligarchy masked as democracy.

And a country with a monarchy as the head of state is an oxymoron of democracy in any way you see it.

What a ridiculous statement! Of course they can know because it is a knowable fact that any reasonable person can ascertain. People know when they are living in a democracy or not because contrary to what you believe about them, that they have a different opinion than you does not prove that they are brainwashed. It does prove that you extremely arrogant in your thinking, however.

No, because in the United States they have every recourse to free and fair elections. If they want to change things all they need do is go down to the local county clerk's office and put their name on a ballot as independents or under any political party of their choosing and stand for office to advance their views. It's just that simple. They can work to have a referendum put on a ballot. They can openly lobby their legislators. Indeed, they can protest in the streets to their hearts content, providing they are not actively destroying private property or violating the rights of others, etc. The protesters in HK do not have the recourse that those in a democracy do. That does NOT mean that I would approve of every action they take, particularly any destruction of property or violating other's natural rights. But you asked if it is a double standard, and my answer is yes as one is a democracy that has ample provision for change to be effected democratically whereas the other is a communist dictatorship that prohibits such and the later fact is exactly what the demonstrators in HK are protesting about.

Which would be a great point...had I ever in any way, shape, or form, said that they didn't know. I said no such thing.

Edward Snowden signed numerous pledges to safeguard the Top Secret and other classified information that he handled every day when he worked for the government. He committed numerous felonies in lying on security interviews and in violating those pledges by illegally releasing that information to third parties. Instead of standing up for his convictions in an American courtroom and the court of public opinion and taking responsibility for his actions, he fled to Russia like the coward he is. You brought up HK, so let me ask you to answer honestly; What do you think would have happened to him had he been Chinese and done something similar and been caught by the communist government there? Would he be heralded as a hero or tried and and punished, possibly executed, for treason?

So many words just to make delude yourself. I feel really sorry for you.

 

[Aepsilons]

And a country with a monarchy as the head of state is an oxymoron of democracy in any way you see it.

The earliest forms of Democracy was the Athenian Democracy. You know that Athens had a Monarchy, right? A Monarchy that listened to the rule of the people.

Still has nothing to do with democracy in it's true sense. What we have is a combination of ochlocracy and oligarchy masked as democracy.

Interests groups, sure, they're bound to be there, given the capitalist nature of the European Union, infused with a bit of socialist theories and a some utilitarianism. But its the closest form of a 'pure' democracy, I can tell you that. It is representative, egalitarian, and one could even argue its fraternity component. To refer to the old French Republican spirit....

 

[Götterdämmerung]

The earliest forms of Democracy was the Athenian Democracy. You know that Athens had a Monarchy, right? A Monarchy that listened to the rule of the people.

A monarchy is a monarchy, not a democracy, but that doesn't mean that the monarch doesn't listen to his people, otherwise it's called a tyranny.

Interests groups, sure, they're bound to be there, given the capitalist nature of the European Union, infused with a bit of socialist theories and a some utilitarianism. But its the closest form of a 'pure' democracy, I can tell you that. It is representative, egalitarian, and one could even argue its fraternity component. To refer to the old French Republican spirit....

The closes we have in Europe is Switzerland and that still is far from true democracy. The French Republic never utter the word democracy either. The motto of the French Revolution was Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité – nothing with démocracie.

The minute a system allows interest groups to form policy that work against the public, it's not a democracy anymore.

Say what you want, it may only give you comfort in your own delusion.

 

[William Hung]

US and Japan do have democracy in the sense that they have their free choice to choose their own lifestyle and elect their head of state. The problem is that these Americans and Japanese have been brainwashed and conditioned to freely, without coercion, choose whatever the state want them to choose. This is generally the case, though, not very Americans and Japanese fall victim to this.

 

[zhongdafeng]

Since Japan is culturally traced to Chinese traditional culture, would a democracy fashioned like the Japanese system work for China and Vietnam?
Chinese PDF posters want China to convert back to more traditional Confucian thinking and preserve its traditional culture. the Japanese model should fit perfectly for China? Japan became democratic after WWII without internal turmoil from monarchy rule. China can follow the same model with no internal bloodshed. what's your thoughts?

I don't think Vietnam is ready yet because we don't have manufacturing capability but China should.

We will adopt one-man-one-vote democracy when we are coming near to Japan's GDP per capital.