Hacker News Reader

Comment by davidw | Hacker News Reader

Democracies are big, messy, and very much imperfect things. They have good sides, and bad sides, and don't always behave how we think they ought to. Like the quote says, democracy is a terrible way to run a country; it's just better than all the others.

Labeling the whole thing as "dead" is pure hyperbole, and probably a lame excuse not to get involved and do the hard work that is necessary to change broken stuff.

If it were dead and nonexistent, then people would not have been able to liberalize marijuana use in Colorado and Washington, nor approved measures allowing gay people to marry the people they love in several states.

View on HN

Just because we get a few token gestures, doesn't mean we have any real change. What happens in Washington and Colorado really doesn't affect the people in power and may be advantageous for them to use in the future as scapegoat material.

Democracy seems reasonably alive at a state level. Most of the complaints & problems seem to be with the federal government.

Those are minor issues blown out of proportion to engage the population, divide it along imaginary lines and have them go through victories and defeats and enjoy the show. It's the circus part of "bread and circuses". Real issues are decided upon without ever consulting you. Just IMHO

> minor issues

Wow, tell that to someone who can finally have all the legal rights that most married couples enjoy. Or all the folks on the other side who are convinced that their own marriages are forever ruined and the country on the road to hell because some people can get married.

Still, I think that specific issue is on the radar all the time and addressed by presidents and politicians precisely because of its divisive nature (can be easily used to divide people into warring factions, for historical/religious/whatever reasons). In the grand scheme of things, there are much more urgent problems to be solved. This is not meant to be dismissive of a particular group who have suffered a particular injustice in a particular point in time (there are many such groups and many injustices that are never discussed on a national level and turned into political shows).

EDIT: To clarify, I fully understand that it's a problem that needs to be addressed. I'm against any injustice against any group of people, based on arbitrary historical prejudices or otherwise. I'm just expressing my opinion on how the people who decide which issues to address and how to address them are motivated by political convenience vs actual priority.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com