Who will change the Government? People?
The same people you believe would fall into chaos and disorder were it not for the government?

And it would fall into chaos because the people haven't kept a check on the Government like they should have been doing,and as a result this Government has almost grown out of control.

So... the people are forced to make up a government, maintain that government, feed that government, so that they are controlled by the government?

What part in that makes the government necessary when by your own admission (because it couldn't be otherwise) people must already be good enough to CHECK on the government?

They can create a Government of their own will,or have one forced on them.

If people believe government is necessary, then apparently it is. Honestly, systems really only give what the people ask for and what the people will allow to happen.

For example, the 911 plane crashes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it only a very small handful of people willing to fight on the planes? Why only a small minority? Technically, and I know this is a bit of a slippery slope, but the collective majority chose to be overtaken with nothing more than box cutters.

Sure. They didn't want to die. But they also didn't do much to stop it.

So in short, the people abuse themselves and they must obviously be totally comfortable with that.

Correction, that is what gives Democracy its strength. However, this is 2009, democracy is becoming increasingly overrated.

How so? Now that we have accessible alternative news, a global network of information, NOW it's when people cannot be trusted?
Why increasingly? Is it overrated as opposed to the time when women couldn't even vote?

Corruption.

Democracy corrupts people?
I always thought it was the concentration of power in the hands of the few that don't have to worry about being liable to the people, i.e. democracy.

No, but those who aren't pleased with what democracy gives them can still be corrupted.

No, I wasnt saying it corrupts people, I was noting the corruption of the politians within most democratic governments.

And when has that ever been different? Politicians are no more corrupt now than they were fifty or a hundred years ago, they're maintaining the status quo. I'd expect them to be a bit less corrupt now if anything, thanks to technology they can be scrutinized more carefully and the opponents of the government can safely organize themselves, also, you know, now that women and minorities can vote it actually reflects the will of the people better.

lol, you really make this too easy. Ok, I'm going to disprove your entire arguement with ONE name: George Bush.

An idiot, and not in power anymore. But how was he more corrupted than Clinton? Nixon? Is invading any country that may or may not be sympathetic to terrorists or have weapons of mass destruction that much different than invading any country that was communist? Is wire tapping without a warrant that much different than wire tapping anyone who was suspected of being a communist?

Nope, sure isnt, which just goes to further prove my point, thanks.

What point? You said the government is more corrupt now and therefore democracy is overrated, my point is that its always been at least this corrupt.

George Bush? You think that George Bush was THE most corrupt politician that has ever lived, and that he is representative of the general shift towards corruption in government moreso than any other politician throughout thousands of years? Fucking hell.

As the population grows, as new ideas are founded, as the world changes in general(and this applies to more than just politics), politicians find more ways to press their arguements without having to actually speak the "truth". Over the past 20 years or so, it has nearly come to a point where you are screwed with any candidate you choose to elect into any given office within the government. 100 years ago this wasnt the case, as much as you may think it was. You further proved my point by pointing out past presidents which were just as corrupt as bush was(bush being the worst, which denotes an increasing factor). As time progresses, democracy will eventually fail all together.

I never said he was the worst and that its getting worse, I said past presidents and most certainly past politicians in general were just as bad if not worse. 100 years ago this certainly was the fucking case, women and black people couldn't even vote, the press was easily controlled and America was still policing the world, only back then it was Latin America, and even Roosevelt would abuse power such as in the incident of the Brownsville affair.

EDIT: actually, in America black men got the vote in 1870, always thought women got the vote first.. Still, half the country's adults couldn't vote on account of being women.

I guess nobody remembers Tricky Dick (Richard Nixon).

Nixon also started the War On ( some)Drugs.

Correction,not just Democracy even Monarchies.

True the the "Peasants" were the lowest political rung on the ladder,but even knights,Kings,and Queens knew they would revolt if stepped on too much,and if the Peasants were in revolt no one would be working the fields or harvesting from them.

What we have now in the U.S. is a Democracy that has ran amok,and is slowly but surely turning into a Fascist Totalitarian State.

W...T...F?

What evidence do you have that prompts you to make that statement?

You're asking deadmanwalking_05 for a logical basis to his political statements?

The new Youth brigades,Civilian Internment Camps,Forced Vaccines,elimination of Posse Comitatus,not being able to audit the federal reserve (Even with increasing public support),and being labeled a terrorist if you speak out against the current administration in office.