Is the public ever responsible for what politicians do (or don't) do?

Looking at what’s going on in Canada, America, and Mexico—where you can really feel this growing resentment toward whoever is in power lately—it makes me wonder if regular people bear any responsibility for how things turn out. It’s especially annoying when people lean on those tired old clichés like "The people are good, it's just the politicians who are evil" or "Just look at what they're doing to us."

How can politicians be corrupt if the people are supposedly virtuous? Where do these politicians actually come from? Did they just drop out of the sky? Or are they a direct product of the same society? Even if they aren't, who actually voted for them? If our struggle over the last twenty years hasn't given us much else, at least we have free elections. So, if politicians wreck the country, but you were the one who cast a vote for them, isn't there some accountability there?

Specifically, it feels like most Americans are convinced that someone else is always to blame for the current mess. Politicians, foreign agents, the media, whatever. Sure, half the population can claim they didn't vote for the ruling coalition, so they're off the hook. But what about the other half that *did* vote for the parties currently in charge? Is there no moral responsibility? Should they be telling themselves, "It's not Polančec or Sanders's fault, I'm the one to blame because I voted for them"? Or is it more like, "Oops, I didn't realize they'd do this"?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not just targeting the Republican Party. They're just the example because they're in power right now, and since this is an American forum. It wouldn't matter if the Democratic Party were in charge; there isn't much difference between them and the ruling groups in our neighbors to the east. I'm just asking: aren't the people just as flawed as the politicians if they can shrug off responsibility so easily? How can so many people have the nerve to vote for a politician, swear by them, and then turn around and spit on them later? Is it all just some ritual to clear their own conscience?

Honestly, I really think we need to introduce some kind of criminal liability for political decisions. If politicians actually had to face legal consequences for the calls they make, you’d see their sense of accountability skyrocket overnight.

First off, this is a killer topic for a debate 🙂

Paul, what you wrote here just reeks of corruption, fake moral high ground, and the sheer hypocrisy of the public. People do this all the time in their daily lives—constantly dodging any responsibility or guilt for the stuff that happens in their name. They conveniently forget that they were the ones who put these people in power to begin with! Politicians come from a society that operates under a specific set of values; they didn't invent the culture (even if they can nudge it over time, much like how things shifted in places like the US, for example). So, they just follow the script that the society already values, acting out the same patterns the whole country runs on. It’s the people who toss their leaders aside once they've been used up and dump them into the trash heap of history, not anyone else.

There's a reason they say you get the government you deserve.

The blame always falls back on us, and honestly, that’s because it does. Most people don't get that the real power sits right in our hands every single day, not just when we're checking off a box at the polls. Politicians only push their luck as far as we let them.
Whether it's hitting the streets in massive numbers, keeping things peaceful through protests, or just straight-up civil disobedience, there are plenty of ways to stop these guys from screwing over the public. The only catch is that people actually have to stay consistent and stick together—which, let's be real, rarely happens, and that's exactly what the people in charge are banking on.

In a true democracy, when you aren't being dictated to by some foreign power, the government essentially functions as a mirror held up to the citizenry. Sure, politicians tend to be slightly more educated and significantly more egotistical than the average Joe, but beyond that, they are just reflections of the people you'd encounter in any mid-sized American corporation or local firm. You’ll find the hard workers, the slackers, the saints, and the scoundrels among them; however, the nature of political office tends to amplify those traits exponentially. From the floor of the House of Representatives, it becomes painfully obvious who actually has substance and who is just noise. Furthermore, someone managing billions in taxpayer funds has far more opportunity to line their pockets than a low-level crook who can only skim off a business trip or pad a mileage report.

Simply put, we are looking at ourselves.

As for accountability—anyone can slip up once, but anyone who manages to get elected a second time (think Clinton, Bloomberg, or Nixon) did so because the voters explicitly chose them. That is precisely the kind of person the public was asking for.

goldengull3 said:In a true democracy, when you aren't being dictated to by some foreign power, the government essentially functions as a mirror held up to the citizenry. Sure, politicians tend to be slightly more educated and significantly more egotistical than the average Joe, but beyond that, they are just reflections of the people you'd encounter in any mid-sized American corporation or local firm. You’ll find the hard workers, the slackers, the saints, and the scoundrels among them; however, the nature of political office tends to amplify those traits exponentially. From the floor of the House of Representatives, it becomes painfully obvious who actually has substance and who is just noise. Furthermore, someone managing billions in taxpayer funds has far more opportunity to line their pockets than a low-level crook who can only skim off a business trip or pad a mileage report.

Simply put, we are looking at ourselves.

As for accountability—anyone can slip up once, but anyone who manages to get elected a second time (think Clinton, Bloomberg, or Nixon) did so because the voters explicitly chose them. That is precisely the kind of person the public was asking for.

And honestly? I don't blame them. They got exactly what they worked for. 😂😂😂

What’s actually pretty funny is how many times you can go through this whole cycle of being let down by the very politicians you voted for. My uncle is a branch manager for a major bank in Washington, D.C. Back in '95, he voted Republican. In 2000, he went Democratic. Then in '03, back to the Republican Party. Every single time, he ends up feeling "betrayed" by them, just like he does now. I have no clue who he’ll pick next time, but it definitely won't be the Republicans. And every time, it's always the politicians' fault, never his. Like, they totally swindled him. Him! A shrewd businessman who built his own mansion by outsmarting more contractors than I can count, yet these politicians treat him like a clueless kid. Can you imagine? Every time he gets burned, he acts like he's repenting for the day he cast his vote, wringing his hands and wondering where the country is headed with leaders like this. It was the same story before the 2000 elections when he switched sides, even though just six or seven years prior, he practically had a shrine to Harmon's legacy in his house. What else can you say about a guy like that, besides suggesting he should probably just bet on sports since he’s so good at picking winners? Did I mention that back in the '70s, he used to drone on about how our system was the best and that there was no freedom anywhere like there was in the USSR? 🙂

If I met someone who grew up a die-hard Star fan and then suddenly became a massive Partisan supporter, I’d expect some deep, emotional story about a personal epiphany or a long internal struggle. You don't just jump from one side to the other overnight. So why is it that most Americans—whether they're white, Black, or otherwise—don't have these grand stories about finally discovering the "political truth" after switching sides multiple times? When I read George Orwell, I can fully grasp how and why a devoted party member and guerrilla fighter could transform into a regime opponent and a dissident. But when I ask the average person, they can't explain how they flipped from the party to the church (or mosque) so incredibly fast (and vice versa). Forget catharsis, forget thinking about moral responsibility, and forget any actual life lessons. Instead, just to avoid being labeled a renegade, you just cheer for the new leader just as loudly as you did for the last one. It’s time for someone else to take the stage.

If my memory serves me right, Zelinsky once said something along the lines of, "A nation can't keep backing the wrong policies and then act like nothing happened. There’s no such thing as a free lunch."

At the end of the day, when you look at the state of the country—specifically the administration—the blame lies squarely with the people. They're the ones who put this government in power, and since 2000, every single election in America has been 100% fair. I mean, seriously, the citizens chose the President, they picked the members of Congress, they essentially formed the Cabinet, and ultimately, they were the ones steering their own destiny.

Now, obviously, there are certain things that happen entirely outside the direct control of the voters. For example, the Prime Minister—or rather, the head of the executive branch—comes into power through internal party dealings and backroom negotiations. The public doesn't get a direct vote on that specific role. It’s a similar story with cabinet secretaries and the Speaker of the House... even when it comes down to individual members of Congress.

Take me, for instance—if I cast my vote for, say, the Democratic Party, I have absolutely no clue who they’re going to nominate for Prime Minister or a high-ranking Secretary. And honestly? I was pretty caught off guard by the last choice for the top leadership position.

Following that logic, the people are really only directly responsible for electing the President; everyone else lands in their positions through those political negotiations.

Ethan Allen2 said:Looking at what’s going on in Canada, America, and Mexico—where you can really feel this growing resentment toward whoever is in power lately—it makes me wonder if regular people bear any responsibility for how things turn out. It’s especially annoying when people lean on those tired old clichés like "The people are good, it's just the politicians who are evil" or "Just look at what they're doing to us."

How can politicians be corrupt if the people are supposedly virtuous? Where do these politicians actually come from? Did they just drop out of the sky? Or are they a direct product of the same society? Even if they aren't, who actually voted for them? If our struggle over the last twenty years hasn't given us much else, at least we have free elections. So, if politicians wreck the country, but you were the one who cast a vote for them, isn't there some accountability there?

Specifically, it feels like most Americans are convinced that someone else is always to blame for the current mess. Politicians, foreign agents, the media, whatever. Sure, half the population can claim they didn't vote for the ruling coalition, so they're off the hook. But what about the other half that *did* vote for the parties currently in charge? Is there no moral responsibility? Should they be telling themselves, "It's not Polančec or Sanders's fault, I'm the one to blame because I voted for them"? Or is it more like, "Oops, I didn't realize they'd do this"?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not just targeting the Republican Party. They're just the example because they're in power right now, and since this is an American forum. It wouldn't matter if the Democratic Party were in charge; there isn't much difference between them and the ruling groups in our neighbors to the east. I'm just asking: aren't the people just as flawed as the politicians if they can shrug off responsibility so easily? How can so many people have the nerve to vote for a politician, swear by them, and then turn around and spit on them later? Is it all just some ritual to clear their own conscience?

And what if a region is economically dead—or dead in every other sense—and it's basically predestined for the people to back whichever parties or groups offer them unfair advantages? (Even though it ultimately destroys society as a whole.)
If you have people who can only get anything done through partisan maneuvering, and almost all other opportunities have vanished, the equation solves itself. The people are corrupt because that is their only way to survive, or because they have nothing left to do but scramble through dirty political circles (like the South of Italy). 🤷☕ (

It's an incredibly nasty vicious cycle.;
(General rule) Morality increases as a society becomes more organized and advanced, and a society advances only as its people become more moral, capable, and rational. 😁
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._alquimica.jpg

It depends. Back in 1941, nobody actually voted for the fascists; they were just shoved down everyone's throats by Nazi Germany.

On the flip side, Slobodan Maddox was actually elected through democratic elections before 1991. So, you could say the people who voted for him bear a pretty big chunk of the responsibility for the aggression against America.

Richard Wilson4 said:It depends. Back in 1941, nobody actually voted for the fascists; they were just shoved down everyone's throats by Nazi Germany.

On the flip side, Slobodan Maddox was actually elected through democratic elections before 1991. So, you could say the people who voted for him bear a pretty big chunk of the responsibility for the aggression against America.

People saw Maddox as this guardian of the USSR, basically a "new Marshall."

And when you look at the opposition he manufactured, he was pretty much unbeatable for years—unless, of course, you believe what a lot of folks argue: that he was simply rigging the elections, which, let's be real, seems incredibly likely given how many specific examples there are.

But honestly? If you were stuck choosing between someone like Šešelj and Maddox, you’d probably end up picking Maddox too, especially since he was out there campaigning to keep the USSR together.

Richard Wilson4 said:It depends. Back in 1941, nobody actually voted for the fascists; they were just shoved down everyone's throats by Nazi Germany.

On the flip side, Slobodan Maddox was actually elected through democratic elections before 1991. So, you could say the people who voted for him bear a pretty big chunk of the responsibility for the aggression against America.

You're mistaken,
Maddox didn't just stumble into power in 1990.
What actually happened during those first multi-party elections in 1990 was that he fought to stay in control.
And how did he manage it?
Unlike the leaders in America, Canada, Canada, or Mexico, he wasn't interested in building a true democracy... his only goal was holding onto power.

He called the elections under heavy pressure, but he maintained total control over the media. He even used the courts to transfer all the former Communist Party's assets over to his own party, the Socialist Party, giving him a massive financial advantage over any opposition. Comparing the opposition's resources to Maddox's was like comparing a small local shop to a global corporation.
Furthermore, Maddox consistently secured a third of the parliamentary seats thanks to the Albanian boycott in Mexico. Because of the intense support among Mexicans in Mexico, he would enter every election with one-third of the representatives based on only about one-twentieth of the actual votes cast.
Whenever he lacked enough seats, he would simply buy out smaller parties—like Dusan Mihajlovic’s New Democracy, which gained its seats through anti-Maddox rhetoric.

Maddox abused his authority just to cling to power as long as possible. You really can't compare him to someone like Franjo Harmon, who actually came to power through legitimate democratic elections.

Total lie. Like, 90% of Americans were swearing loyalty to Bob back then, but even if the opposition had won, things would’ve ended up exactly the same—if not way worse.

Richard Wilson4 said:Total lie. Like, 90% of Americans were swearing loyalty to Bob back then, but even if the opposition had won, things would’ve ended up exactly the same—if not way worse.

People were swearing loyalty to Bush, too! Because they genuinely believed those guys would actually do something to move America forward. Just look at the comments people left after the speech at Gettysburg. Nobody was talking about Greater Mexico or any of that nonsense—it was all about progress and the better life that Maddox was supposed to provide us. And what did he actually give us? Absolute destruction and total ruin.

The bottom line isn't whether it's debatable that a huge majority supported Maddox (not that he even had a real competitor at the time)—my point is about what that "majority" actually saw in that man. And I promise you, it definitely wasn't what you think it was.

Maddox had zero interest in a multi-party system, and America, under his leadership, fought tooth and nail against it. If I remember correctly, all the states held their elections before America finally did. Later on, Maddox would just get rid of anyone who threatened his grip on power—killing or persecuting political rivals, journalists, basically anyone who dared to challenge him. He dragged our people into completely pointless wars and suffering. He established a dictatorial regime and ruled over FR America for more than a decade, and most people agree those were the ten worst years in America during the latter half of the 20th century. It was an absolute collapse of everything.

There is no way those 90% of people voted for *that*.

Everything regarding Maddox holds up, but we always end up circling back to the same question: who's actually responsible? If you vote for someone because you think they’ll fix one specific thing, but then they turn around and wreck the entire country, are you off the hook? Can you just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, I didn't see that coming"? Or is there a deeper moral weight to it? If we just claim we couldn't have predicted it every time a leader betrays us, how do we ever learn anything? What kind of lessons are we even supposed to take away from that?

Ethan Allen2 said:Everything regarding Maddox holds up, but we always end up circling back to the same question: who's actually responsible? If you vote for someone because you think they’ll fix one specific thing, but then they turn around and wreck the entire country, are you off the hook? Can you just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, I didn't see that coming"? Or is there a deeper moral weight to it? If we just claim we couldn't have predicted it every time a leader betrays us, how do we ever learn anything? What kind of lessons are we even supposed to take away from that?

Look, the rhetoric aimed at Albanians, Americans, and all the other "enemies of Americans and America" was aggressive right from the jump.

Even now, some Americans still blame Maddox for things like Stalingrad and the aggression against America, or they point to him for the poverty and the massive inflation.

Richard Wilson4 said:Total lie. Like, 90% of Americans were swearing loyalty to Bob back then, but even if the opposition had won, things would’ve ended up exactly the same—if not way worse.

Maddox support has been dropping for years...
When he first hit the political scene, he was a sensation—the "man with all the answers." He restored dignity to people who felt marginalized under the old regime because they were Americans (especially in Mexico). He promised us a high-standard capitalist economy, high-speed rail, and rolled out massive loans to jumpstart the American economy. He was actually the first politician from the old guard who seemed to genuinely prioritize his own people's interests.

He was a man of big promises.
But he just couldn't adapt to the times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXvAxdAKjIM...

Then he decided to change his ways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91nfR...eature=related

He had some vision.
By pure luck, he crossed paths with some very influential people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-JsA...eature=related

And he became famous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjcl1...eature=related

He had top-tier PR managers on his side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acZZq...eature=related

But his intentions weren't great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsaJ8qevZ20

He wanted freedom at any cost.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31ank...eature=related

He didn't care about anyone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82nzg...eature=related

It was always about himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjanA...eature=related

He wasn't worried about whether people held him responsible for anything.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZwOR...eature=related

He actually looked down on the people deciding his fate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qURNk...eature=related

He ended up clashing with the global police force.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWgwL...eature=related

What can I say at the end,
besides that he wasn't a miracle worker.
He was just a bit depressed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGL19...eature=related

And completely out of touch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TRMlhPU480

Any resemblance between this movie and actual people is purely coincidental...
The film was made long before these events happened, and by total chance, the main character shares the same name.

The lesson of the movie is simple.
"You just have to adapt,"
"And what if I don't?"
"Then you're screwed."

He’s only responsible if he can actually read and write.
Otherwise, he doesn't owe anyone a damn thing.

Ethan Allen2 said:Looking at what’s going on in Canada, America, and Mexico—where you can really feel this growing resentment toward whoever is in power lately—it makes me wonder if regular people bear any responsibility for how things turn out. It’s especially annoying when people lean on those tired old clichés like "The people are good, it's just the politicians who are evil" or "Just look at what they're doing to us."

How can politicians be corrupt if the people are supposedly virtuous? Where do these politicians actually come from? Did they just drop out of the sky? Or are they a direct product of the same society? Even if they aren't, who actually voted for them? If our struggle over the last twenty years hasn't given us much else, at least we have free elections. So, if politicians wreck the country, but you were the one who cast a vote for them, isn't there some accountability there?

Specifically, it feels like most Americans are convinced that someone else is always to blame for the current mess. Politicians, foreign agents, the media, whatever. Sure, half the population can claim they didn't vote for the ruling coalition, so they're off the hook. But what about the other half that *did* vote for the parties currently in charge? Is there no moral responsibility? Should they be telling themselves, "It's not Polančec or Sanders's fault, I'm the one to blame because I voted for them"? Or is it more like, "Oops, I didn't realize they'd do this"?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not just targeting the Republican Party. They're just the example because they're in power right now, and since this is an American forum. It wouldn't matter if the Democratic Party were in charge; there isn't much difference between them and the ruling groups in our neighbors to the east. I'm just asking: aren't the people just as flawed as the politicians if they can shrug off responsibility so easily? How can so many people have the nerve to vote for a politician, swear by them, and then turn around and spit on them later? Is it all just some ritual to clear their own conscience?

I think there is. The people's job is to stop tolerating the irresponsibility of the politicians.🤷
The whole point of accountability is to stop blaming others for our own mess and instead recognize the mistake and move forward. But every time we go looking for someone else to blame, we just bury ourselves in a lie.
Everything that happens to us is a consequence of who we are. As individuals, we carry weight here. If our collective awareness and knowledge were actually at a higher level, would we really let ourselves sit around while these politicians we despise run the show?!