The general populace... Malobear: "The general populace are too thick for democracy to work." Too general of a statement,where and who?  Geoff: For anyone who comments on this who has also made it onto my friends list - there is a blog for you to read before you comment. Geoff: OK, Fiesty isn't on my friends list - and I don't want to be considered an arsehole, despite my acknowledgement that I can be one. I do not consider the general populace too stupid for democracy to work. I consider democratic countries to eventually become too complacent and to allow fuckwits to take control. Democracy works if people are taught that, "If you do not engage in democracy then you are doomed to be ruled by your inferiors." People need to be encouraged into taking a stand against those who want to manipulate the system. //Edit - clarification  chronology: Geoff. With respect, your argument is all over the place. Sounds like you are just pi@@ed off with life, not 'Democracy'.  fiestyT: lol imao.why dont democratic countries work.we live were free.an we dont have 2 take sum 2 faced sob crap.i must admit obama isnt doing 2 good.were in debt. but were free unlike places on da other side of da world.so wat have u been smokin b/c pot here is illegal.unless u got it medical Geoff: lol OK. My point was obviously not made. Under a democratic regime people are pissed off over the little things. Didn't that come across as implied in what I said? Should I not assume the intelligence of those who will read it? Or should I just delete the thread? -- And in answer to your assumption, no - I am not pissed off with life. I've faced that road. I just wanted to see how people react to their tail being twisted. But I didn't want to do it in such a way as to offend my friends, which is why I also posted a blog explaining my actions. In retrospect, this has been a failed experiment. Its entire premise was flawed, not the actions of the experimental subjects. //Edit - changed the word 'question' to the word 'assumption', after re-reading the post that prompted it.  davidk14: . "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same." Ronald Reagan . chronology: 'Having their Tails twisted'. Now Geoff I will agree with you there, some members of Wireclub are knuckle dragging Cro Magnons, (says me looking up). davidk14: . Chrono, You used to be arrogant and obnoxious. Now you are just the opposite. You are obnoxious and arrogant. So, keep talking, someday you'll say something intelligent. Currently your stupidity is an insult to stupid people. You are a man who always sticks by his convictions and if ignorance is bliss, you must be the happiest person alive. .  StuckInTheSixties: Democracy sucks. The best that can be said of it is that it's better than any alternative. davidk14: . We know for a fact that large scale socialism and communism has failed, now you think that democracy has failed? What's left? Anarchism? We all know that it has never failed. . chronology: David, 'large scale socialism and communism failed', well yes, but let us not forget that the U.S.S.R. was subjected to the full force of American destabilisation. When Russia sent a few missiles to Cuba, the U.S. went into hysterics. Seems no one in the U.S. noticed the U.S.S.R. was surrounded by hundreds of American Missiles and Bombers in Europe, Turkey, Iran, Scandinavia, Japan, all Nuclear tipped and pointing at Russia.  oooREDEYEooo: 'EDITED UNTITLED COPYRIGHT' ..."sadly America proved 'democracy' and 'forced democracy' do not work 'ideally' and/or 'systematically'...most countries have not much of a choice as 'eagle democracy' opposed to 'true democracy' is a poor representative at this current point in history...thus why do we as 'democratic nations' never have the 'masses' vote on if 'we' as 'united nations' go to war or not et al...pretty pathetic when a gun totting creten from Texas determines 'history' and his brainwashed congregation can never admit 'defeat' and/or being 'wrong'...eye mean...this highest so-called representation of 'democracy' slaughtered the Indian's then tried to kill and murder each other...and hilarious they still carry guns as civilians and shoved it in the Constitution to bear that right so powerfully to this very second...protecting yourselves is one thing...dictating to the 'world' is another...we are all now 'officially' all Jews to America"...oh how eye love 'democracy' without true 'freedom'...vomit'...!!!... oooLEAVE-US-ALL-ALONE-EYEooo PS : '...synthesis oil-money-land and blood instead...' davidk14: . What Is Freedom? by Doctor Mark Cooray What is freedom? How is freedom related to liberty? Liberty conveys the idea of the right or the ability of the individual to do what he wants. Freedom on the other hand is a word which contains inbuilt restrictions. My freedom to swing my hands stops at my neighbor’s nose. A free society contains individuals who are free to do what they do, while respecting the freedoms of others. Freedom is the liberty of the individual coupled with concern by the liberated individual for the liberties of others. Freedom cannot be defined, except through an analysis of the restrictions on human action. Therefore, the area of freedom available to the individual in any society is a residuary one. The individual is at liberty to do what law and social custom do not forbid. Therefore, the content of the restrictions on liberty are important. What distinguishes a free society from other societies is the nature and extent of the legal and customary restrictions on freedom. . davidk14: . What Is Liberty? Written by Darrell Anderson The word freedom implies an individual is unfettered in any manner to act. Freedom implies no boundaries to limit human actions. The concept of boundaries, however, transforms the word freedom into the word liberty. Whereas the concept of freedom ignores the concept of obligations, the concept of liberty implies potential obligations. The word freedom ignores interactions with other humans, the word liberty acknowledges those interactions. The word liberty describes specific freedoms of action without obligations toward others,but recognizes that obligations might exist. The concept of boundaries introduces obligations toward other people. The concept of freedom implies unrestricted movement and actions regardless of boundaries, but the concept of liberty imply restrictions on actions because of boundaries. Liberty acknowledges possible boundaries and merely is freedom from fiat boundaries. . ☀▃▂▁/V\iragε▁▂▃☀: this thread sounds more like a segregation invitation "general populace" too thick for democracy... only a certain race, class or (smart)group should have rights? what makes democracy doable (yes with tweeks) is it's for everyone.  LiptonCambell: pfft you know just as well as I that that "Peoples Rupublic" shit is just communist spin. StuckInTheSixties: Yes, of course. Obviously, all kinds of countries call themselves "Democratic" this and "Republic" of that. It's fairly meaningless in that context. But conceptually, what's the difference between a "democracy" and a "republic"? Geoff: I refer my learned friend to the works of Plato. //Edit - I felt I should add this, as I don't usually get to post a URL and have it within the rules. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato's_Republic | Politics Chat Room 24 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
