Democracy is not for everyone
By somwerNdmiddle •
http://www.iq2oz.com/events/event-details/special-events/09-festival-dan...
The title of the debate was very much thought provoking while I was "browsing" the TV channels more or less 3 hours ago, this was aired on BBC. I thought it was Doha Debates on a different setting but it wasn't. It was very interesting to listen to the arguments presented by the speakers from the For and Against teams and at the end of all their arguments, one will really look for a very satisfying answer to the question, Is democracy not for everyone?
well what do you think?
It is interesting that many in the West seem to think there is only one form of democracy, i.e. theirs, when there exists very important differences in democratic systems between (say) USA and Sweden, France and UK, Ireland and Scotland, for example.
When we ask, for instance, when China is going to be democratic, what we seem to mean to say always is: "When is China going to copy the West?" But China does not want to copy the West; they want to evolve a system, including a democratic system, that can work in China.
Another example of our arrogance, in my opinion, is with respect to the system in Cuba. We say there is no democracy in Cuba, but in fact there is democracy in Cuba, it's just not the same as ours. And if democracy is the be all and end all of everything for us then why are we not shouting about the absence of democracy in Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al?
exlegend, great idea
live tv show with all candidates:) brilliant.
Yalla!
i have a solution - hold the candidates in a Big Brother cell/mansion so the voters can observe their behaviour before the elections :)
Apart from all these its an expensive affair too. One election in India costs 2 billion INR. ;(((
______________________________________________
- Listen to Many...Speak to a Few -
Sure, brit. We could all gather at the same time on the Internet. But you're right again, democracy requires 'knowing' people. You can't give a Formula 1 car to a Qatari! The result will be devastating.
As per my earlier post, we agree on the "Athenic" model. However, with modern technology we should be able to enlarge the numbers and still be able to "have our say" in key decisions.
The main problem tody is that Politicians sicerely believe that the ordinary person is dim witted and does not comprehend issues sufficiently to make a decision - so they do it on our behalf.
Those who invented democracy (Athens) had a 'direct' democracy. Everybody gathered in the agora (market place) and chose his favorite. Everybody knew everybody. Today democracy is 'indirect'. We elect people without knowing them based only on their 'promises'. Aristotle himself limited the size of a functioning democracy to 5.000. Criteria, they must all fit into the agora at the same time!
There could be many forms of democracy. One is a multi-party system with elections every four or five years. Another could be a single-party system. All you need is some kind of democratic process, i.e. so people can have a say and can in different ways participate in national, social, political affairs etc.
It's not hard to imagine a single-party system being more democratic than a multi-party system. There's more to ensuring democracy than just having two or more political parties to choose from on a piece of paper.
interesting!!
Democracy should not be the majority ruling minorities, it should be the majority make sure the minorities are having all their rights as long as all are practicing patriotism in it's right way.
paying taxes is democracy only when you are paid back by the govrmnt through health, streets and senility is equally insured for all citizens, majority or minority.
Most important is patriotism.
Yalla!
...in my country democracy had been degraded, abused, overused, misused a million times, that's why i'm here in qatar to experience democracy in the making......
The problem with "modern day democracy" is that those elected by us, usually abuse the powers given to them.
In today's day and age, and with the technology available, there is no reason, why we cannot and SHOULD NOT have referendums for critical issues.
ie.
War in Afghanistan
Ratifying the EU Treaty
Perks for MPs
Banning Jordan, aka Katie Price from the News of the World... etc
There are some who do not wish their voice to be heard. This is where democracy is not required.
It was a form of democracy practiced in ancient Athens.
If an issue or poject was relevant or dear to you, then you voted in a room in front of everyone.
I suppose in today's terms it would be a referendum. So, if Tony wanted to go to war, and I disagreed, I could call a referendum. Then the majority decision would be binding.
The Roman form was a triumvirate.
Stealth, kingdoms and Emirates are only for the Kings and Emirs and not for the general public.
What we need is the Athenic form of democracy.
democracy is only for the elected members. not for the general population.
If you don't believe in democracy(of whatever type), then one can assert that you don't believe in individuals having a voice; so we can take your anti-democratic advice and ignore your views with a clear conscience.
QED
"Deaths in the Bible. God - 2,270,365
not including the victims of Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the
many plagues, famines, fiery serpents, etc because no specific numbers
were given. Satan - 10."
yeah...dont tell me about this!
Try to implement democracy in a country with last 60 years under communism!!!...:(
Drac 100 years may not be long for Vampires but it is too long for humans.
India really has potential drac as is any country in the world that has never had the chance to have democracy.
India is a Democracy with enormous potential.
It still is a large third world country, but not for long.
It has issues with poverty, illiteracy, a social caste system. This will all change in the next... 100 years.
there you go, we have witnessed the failure in our times itself with those two nations. like said by britexpat, those nations needed a lot of internal development before reaching a level where democracy could be implemented.
Setting India as an example is not a good idea. My visit to India has introduced me to a huge ocean of cultures and without democracy there would be larger numbers of social problems than that which currently exists.
India is an exception, in my opinion, and the same cannot be applied everywhere. Plus we cannot ignore the initial internal problems after the system was applied. Plus, its the people of India who demanded it and were not forced to accept democracy.
Democracy Only some word in fake life ! wake up ppl !
India is the largest as well as Powerful democracy.
After America , Russia and China it stands 4th in the list of Powerful Nations.(Troops)
ROFL..LMAOO
@ brit
i could picture that brit, that happens in my country all the time.
@EX
that's why instilling or indoctrinating or whatever politically correct term the process western type of democracy is to be "applied" to two interesting cases like Iraq and Afghanistan is the consideration of culture and religion, because two these most important factors have so much effect on democracy.
Right Brit, decomracy cannot be imposed by external powers.
Democracy must be the ultimate goal, but nations have to evolve internally to reach this stage..
Democracy will lead to Confusion-ism in China.
Even the Great Confucius will be confused as to which ism to preach!
i would leave China out of it, only the fist of Zen can handle that cradle :P
Just imagine democracy in China! :}
...the political system in China is more open and all that but i don't support American or European style government in China.
It's completely foreign and clashes with Chinese values and society.
I think China should develop a political system that is independent yet takes into account elements of western experience.
A Billion voting the way they've been told to by party chiefs..
Interesting topic, in my opinion the application of Democracy completely depends on the nature of the nation it is being applied on.
i am talking about nations that have evolved as a result of integration of different cultures like Australia, America, Canada, UK, etc. they definitely need a democratic system to ensure justice and avoid discrimination to the immigrants who can be of diverse cultural, ethnic, religious, etc. backgrounds. The reason is the rights of each individual as a citizen of that particular nation will not be violated along side their own morals and values.
but countries that are pre-occupied with descendants of the same region and continue to be occupied with the same people, then introduction of democracy can lead to chaos. simply because historically, majority of any given mass stick to ancestral norms and hence suppress any new ideas that endanger the existing system.
just a piece of my understanding.