why the USA are not a democracy?

Considering that they are usually the MAJORITY in most if not ALL of these countries, mainly US I am talking about, it would make sense that they would be holding alot of the higher parts of the governemtn sheerly because of numbers.

Dont worry, all his posts are really scitzo and make no sense.

Personally the electoral college and the two party system I feel is the least democratic thing a country could have.  How can two near identical parties be any better than one?  Its not.  Washington said this country should hav eno political parties, although I dont think there should be none, i think the more, the merrier.

I don't like two-party systems myself. However, since the constitution makes no mention of them - and indeed the founding fathers were anti the whole idea of political parties, it's interesting how they actually come to arise.

There are a couple of reasons. The technical one is the 'first-past-the-post' voting system in single-member constitutencies, a system shared by Britain, which has also suffered from two-party rule. Multi-party systems almost invariably use some form of proportional representation for electing parliaments or congresses. You can't easily do that in a presidential election of course, though you could have a re-run system like Louisiana does for senators (and France does for Presidents).

Possibly more important though, and this also applies to Britain, is that the majority of people who vote do so from habit (when they do vote: around half of Americans don't). They vote the same way every time, twisting the issues to justify their choice, rather than making theit choice based upon the issues - or even on the candidate's qualifications.

As a result parties perpetuate, except in very rare circumstances of social upheaval.

The people who actually vote rationally in elections form a small minority. So how can one argue that a system that provides for the majority of voters (saving them having to think) is undemocratic?

It would surely be elitist and oligarchic to have a system that was preferred by the minority that are looking for a rational political system?

The two-party system hasn't been foisted on people. It's their democratic choice.

(And, incidentally, I do think the primary system helps the situation in the US. I'd like to see something more like it used in the UK.)

Itapevi, I see that you are in depression. I was in depression one and a half year ago and I could get rid of it. I don't know if I can help you, but if you want you can send PMs to me. I'll be glad to listen to you... and please take the thought of suicide out of your mind...

As for the topic, I think the Anglo-Saxon type of government is a pseudo-democracy. You have to elect your leaders among two main parties, which dominate the national politics. Especially after the end of the Cold War very few parties could present alternative social and political projects. Neo-liberalism dominates the world. You aren't allowed to question capitalism. So peoples elect their leaders according to their personal characteristics.... Also, most important decisions are taken by the multi-national financial capital owners. So the representative liberal democracy is in crisis. And the government  by the "demos" is an illusion...

Europe is largely the same case. Let's not try to reinforce the Europe-American rivalry. I don't believe in it.