Politicians: Rulers or Servants of the People?

[Drewcifer]

I was talking about France's non with my dad yesterday, he was of the mind that the political elite in much of Europe still sees themselves as "rulers" albeit democratically elected as opposed to an American ideal of politicians as "the employees and servants of the people"; and the French and Dutch no votes were a repudiation of that top down mindset. Is this true? Are there such fundamental differences amongst attitudes towards the people in the political classes of different democracies? I should add that my dad is a lifelong conservative Republican from a political family, he has become strongly anti-Bush because he feels Bush has the same top down view of democratic political power (and is in bed with the Jesus uber alles squad).

Is a prime minister or a president an elected king? Should they be? Are they rulers or servants?

 

[Stylesjl]

The rulers

Albeit if the rulers are bad we get rid of them or restrict their power

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

They serve and lead the people. No one rules us.

 

[eyrei]

Let us just say that you wouldn't get an honest answer out of a politician if you asked this question.

 

[YNCS]

I was talking about France's non with my dad yesterday, he was of the mind that the political elite in much of Europe still sees themselves as "rulers" albeit democratically elected as opposed to an American ideal of politicians as "the employees and servants of the people";

Do you honestly think that people like Clinton and Bush think of themselves as "employees and servants?" Bush particularly views himself as part of the ruling class.

 

[E-Raser]

Doesn't matter whom to announce- they are all kings for one (or more) periods.
In fact I know noone who really thinks they are servants for the people as they should be.
That's why all power must belong to the proletarians!

 

[King Alexander]

Politicians in Europe or the U.S are rulers --- end of story. 'Democracy' just exists in papers.

 

[Godwynn]

They used to be servants, now I see them as rulers.

 

[Dann]

Politicians = servants of the people?



They just pretend to be so before they get elected. Then revert to true form once they're in office.

And this attitude is universal throughout the world.

 

[Evil Tyrant]

Politicians = servants of the people?



They just pretend to be so before they get elected. Then revert to true form once they're in office.

And this attitude is universal throughout the world.

I have to agree with that. When you think about it the kings of old were more honest with us than politicians. Kings were our rulers and everyone knew it, politicians are our rulers but have convinced us that they are not.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

They are servants to the need of the people to be ruled

 

[Taliesin]

Contempt for the governing is as corrosive to the polis as contempt for the governed, and is a weapon wielded even more gleefully by the forces of anti-democracy. There are corrupt politicians-- and some systemic corruption due to the power of business-- but I have strong faith that the vast majority of politicians lead public lives because they want to serve the public good. People who shout (or, more accurately, sneer) that First World government is systemically and irretrievably corrupt do so largely because they would like others to excuse particular cases of corruption as inevitable. Those who profit from weakening democracy lead the chorus proclaiming government to be irredeemable, because if they successfully convince the public of this then democracy will be destroyed.

 

[greekguy]

They are supposed to serve us, but they have become rulers.

 

[Yom]

A rose by any other name would smell as putrid.

 

[sysyphus]

Politicians in democracies would behave more like servants if the electorate was better at filtering bs and taking their vote seriously (some do but most don't).

That said, I don't see any difference between "European democracy" and "American democracy".

 

[Specialist290]

My op: Both and neither. Politicians are, by nature, fickle and autocratic. However, for most to stay in office, they need at least an inkling of good relations w/ the people they govern (except in the most despotic regimes, where all they really need to keep happy is the army). It's give-and-take, IMO.

 

[E-Raser]

My op: Both and neither. Politicians are, by nature, fickle and autocratic. However, for most to stay in office, they need at least an inkling of good relations w/ the people they govern (except in the most despotic regimes, where all they really need to keep happy is the army). It's give-and-take, IMO.

Well? I give them my vote and my taxmoney and I recieve exactly what...
...except broken promisses?

 

[Gelion]

Ideally all politicans are people's servants. In pactice they are rulers as long as people think they are doing a good job. The difference between free society and non-free society is that in the latter when the ruler sux people cannot replace him.

 

[zulu9812]

Ideally all politicans are people's servants. In pactice they are rulers as long as people think they are doing a good job. The difference between free society and non-free society is that in the latter when the ruler sux people cannot replace him.

However, in the democracies which exist today, one ruler is nearly always replaced by one of similar ilk - e.g. Tories and New Labour

 

[E-Raser]

Agree to zulu, mainly you may choose between a giantic and a collosal pile of crap.

That's why all power should belong to the proletarians