The 4 yeared 2 Terms

[The Vegan Marxist]

To me, if there was anything that I would want to be taken out of power it would be the two terms b.s. for a president to be in power. I think the decision on how long the president remains in power should be up to the people, themselves. Chavez has shown us how this can work & be successful as well, so I don't know why we shouldn't destroy this law here in the states. What does everyone else think?

[(A)narcho-Matt]

but chavez has also shown he can be a bit of a dick-tator....

[SandiNeesta]

Since I can't imagine any possible president doing anything but catering to the wealthy of this country it's pretty much a non-issue for me. We could kick one right out after another and they'd just be replaced by more of the same so why bother.

[The Douche]

To me, if there was anything that I would want to be taken out of power it would be the two terms b.s. for a president to be in power. I think the decision on how long the president remains in power should be up to the people, themselves. Chavez has shown us how this can work & be successful as well, so I don't know why we shouldn't destroy this law here in the states. What does everyone else think?



Hahahahahaha. Ok man.


I would just like to point out that Bush won reelection, would you like it if he were still president right now?

[Dimentio]

I on the contrary believe that term limits are universally necessary, though not the most acute reform. Ideally, an executive should sit for about one to two years.

In bourgeois republics though, especially in such ones where there is a vibrant class struggle, term limits work to the advantage of the propertied classes. Often, popular resentment against the ruling class is cataclysed in the face of a political leader who is elected on an anti-establishment platform and then compelled to undertake anti-establishment reforms to satisfy his or her (often his) popular base amongst the people.

While the people certainly have the will-power to transform the country, most people are mentally wired to follow individuals before following ideas, a heritage from our background as hunter-gatherers. Thus, the term end of a popular populist leader often spell the beginning of the end of progressive reforms. That is even if the leader largely was a figurehead, as the media image often is more important than reality for the formation of a political movement in our age.

In socialist societies though, we should try to avoid personalism as much as possible. The rule of legislative institutions should not fall into the hands of parliaments or presidents, but preferably into the hands of the general population. Hence, "leaders" should really be appointed for one-year terms and be limited to carrying out the popular will.

[The Vegan Marxist]

but chavez has also shown he can be a bit of a dick-tator....

Yeah, I'd like for you to prove that to me, because I'm not an Anarchist, & I don't care if the State is used to help implement Communism.

[Red Commissar]

I'd rather the top executive post be refreshed from time to time. It's dangerous for one person to sit there interrupted with the cronyism that might end up occurring.

There is a better way to have a more efficient executive branch. This process puts too much faith in one person, and we've seen how easily polls can be manipulated in some countries.

[GPDP]

I'd rather we do away with the executive branch altogether if you ask me.

The bigger problem IMO is the candidate-centered nature of elections and the political system as a whole, not to mention the role of private campaign finance. I think if we move to a party-centered election system and an entirely publicly-financed campaign system, there will be little need for term limits.

It goes without saying, of course, that adopting a party-centered system funded entirely with public money would still be subject to corruption under a capitalist system, even under the best circumstances. In a socialist system, however, I think such a scheme would work better (though I'm not sure elections would run the same way).

[h9socialist]

Frankly I think term limits are crap! Two different politicians owned by the same special interests is no progress -- and most of the time that's all term limits can produce. Term limits also tend to wipe out institutional memory and political skills.

It would be better to have publicly financed campaigns and a crackdown on lobbying by big moneyed groups. It would also make more sense to have proportional representation, and a parlimentary legislature. Abolishing the electoral college would be a good idea too. These measures aren't :confused:perfect, but they would go a lot further in advancing democracy and limiting the influence of private property, than term limits ever will.

[GPDP]

Frankly I think term limits are crap! Two different politicians owned by the same special interests is no progress -- and most of the time that's all term limits can produce. Term limits also tend to wipe out institutional memory and political skills.

It would be better to have publicly financed campaigns and a crackdown on lobbying by big moneyed groups. It would also make more sense to have proportional representation, and a parlimentary legislature. Abolishing the electoral college would be a good idea too. These measures aren't :confused:perfect, but they would go a lot further in advancing democracy and limiting the influence of private property, than term limits ever will.

Pretty much what I said, but you did add the need for proportional representation. Single-member districts need to go.

I think it must be stressed that term limits are not a solution, but merely a band-aid on the far bigger problem. Yet people stick to the idea for some reason, even when they don't really work. Perhaps it's out of attachment to the wider system or merely a lack of imagination on their part to think of a better way to organize the political system that would do away with the perceived need for term limits. Either way, I think it's worth pursuing radical electoral reform, if only to weaken the power of the capitalist class and shift the balance of power more to our side somewhat.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Term limits are about the most undemocratic thing ever. Should a progressive politician ever be elected in say, the United States, they won't be around long enough to actually change anything, eight years just isn't a long time in the life of a revolutionary, or even a progressive reformist. Chavez has been president for nearly eleven years, it is only recently that he has been able to push for real social reforms. You can call Chavez a dictator all you want, but the working class clearly like the guy, so give them what they want. But forget about Chavez, just look at the great achievements made by people like Stalin, Fidel Castro, Mao, Kim il-Sung, Hoxha, etc. achievements that simply would not have been possible if these people were bound by undemocratic term limits.

[Dimentio]

Term limits are about the most undemocratic thing ever. Should a progressive politician ever be elected in say, the United States, they won't be around long enough to actually change anything, eight years just isn't a long time in the life of a revolutionary, or even a progressive reformist. Chavez has been president for nearly eleven years, it is only recently that he has been able to push for real social reforms. You can call Chavez a dictator all you want, but the working class clearly like the guy, so give them what they want. But forget about Chavez, just look at the great achievements made by people like Stalin, Fidel Castro, Mao, Kim il-Sung, Hoxha, etc. achievements that simply would not have been possible if these people were bound by undemocratic term limits.

There are some points there, but overally when socialism has been achieved, there should be either strict term limits, no executive or both.

[Comrade Gwydion]

We have no term limits here, and our PM has recently failed to complete a term for the 4th time... most likely he'll have a 5th chance.

That said, I am not for a term limit. I am however, for a lot of peer pressure within the parties to change leadership^^

[Tablo]

At the end of each term the President should be set aflame and pushed into a pit as a sacrifice to the demons of Communism.

Seriously I see need for a term limit when an individual is given great power. Power corrupts and Chavez is no exception.

[GPDP]

At the end of each term the President should be set aflame and pushed into a pit as a sacrifice to the demons of Communism.

Seriously I see need for a term limit when an individual is given great power. Power corrupts and Chavez is no exception.

Then the answer is to structure the political system such that an individual is NOT given great power. Power should be concentrated at the base, not at the top. If it's at the top, something has gone wrong, and we need to do better than slap on a Mickey Mouse half-assed measure like term limits.

[Ramon Mercador]

Honeslty the 5-year Plan was STALINS idea and anyone who says that the Trots came up with it (a stupid claim with NO SOURCE) is a Trotskyite liar.

Long live Stalin