Democracy is a failed experiment

[Chogy]

Modern successful societies have a system that can be called "Capitalism with oversight." Absolutely PURE capitalism doesn't exist, probably never did, but the closest was probably England at a time when there was little to no laws regarding child labor, monopolies, environmental abuse.

Pure capitalism is Darwinian at its core. Anything goes - if you can get away with paying child laborers 10 cents per day, and the market bears that, you're good to go. You can dump your waste anywhere, rivers for example. You can collude with other rich capitalists to artificially boost prices. The list is endless; thankfully, none of this goes on, legally, at least.

By tempering pure capitalism with sensible laws, you can get the best out of it and suppress the worst. At the heart of capitalism is the need for equal opportunity under the law. This means the black immigrant from Chad has the exact same opportunities and circumstances as the native born person. It is up to the individual to make the most of his opportunities.

I think we can agree that when China introduced elements of capitalism into its system, China took off economically. I don't see how that can be disputed.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Dont take off on a tangent. Irrelevant. I asked for specific examples of how you think that those three 'examples' are included in Chinese system. I asked you a very clear question, and since I dont know, I expect an answer from you.

Secondly, you claim that democracy is a bad thing. Agreed. But then why are you trying to defend some of the very democratic principles which you claim to exist in China? Are you confused about democracy?

Even if I did not say democracy is bad, but

1, Diamond is good, beautiful, everyone thought it was not a bad thing, but the poor can not pay it. The poor need to buy an ornament for their own situation, the developing countries are poor, sir.

2, Western democracy is not only democracy, other countries have the right and is necessary to adopt their own form of democracy.

 

[gpit]

Communism looks good on paper, but has failed practically. Hence the Chinese bosses have tried to include some capitalism and a token democracy into the system. If power truly belonged to the people, then why is it concentrated in the very few politburo members' hands? Why dont the people have any say? Got any answers?

Democracy is also good on paper, why is power only concentrated on a few families (India, Singapore, Japan, The Philippines, etc. etc.) And why people do not having any says? For instance, majority of US citizens want to stop the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. For instance GWBush was not supported by majority population. For instance, ordinary people want to punish Wall Street alligators for messing up the economy…

Got no answer?

...

If democracy is a farce, pray do tell us what is the better alternative? You got so much brains to criticize democracy, the surely you must have the brains to suggest an alternative, no?

"If democracy is a farce", don't attempt to lie in the public as some democracy advocates, I said “your democracy”, not “democracy”.

Get your literacy?

 

[lem34]

Dont take off on a tangent. Irrelevant. I asked for specific examples of how you think that those three 'examples' are included in Chinese system. I asked you a very clear question, and since I dont know, I expect an answer from you.

Secondly, you claim that democracy is a bad thing. Agreed. But then why are you trying to defend some of the very democratic principles which you claim to exist in China? Are you confused about democracy?

I simply do not agree with the present assertion made by the likes of you and gambit that the ultimate perfct method of governance is what exists today in india or america etc. I think we should look at all governance systems and try to take the best out of each. I think merit is just as important as popular and you know if you cant see the three points i at this moment cant be bothered to tell you Im gonna have a cigar and coffee lol

 

[jamal18]

Interesting point, gentlemean.

Most of this love of democracy comes from the infatuation people had with ancient greece.

Plato, widely believed to be a great proponent of democracy, thought of democracy as a second best system.

He thought the best system was rule by a single 'wise' or 'enlightened' person.

My two paisa...

 

[gubbi]

I simply do not agree with the present assertion made by the likes of you and gambit that the ultimate perfct method of governance is what exists today in india or america etc.

Nobody ever said Democracy is perfect. But its the closest that comes for efficient governance - with all people getting onboard being happy with the power they wield. That is the important point there that many tend to miss or overlook.

Show me another method of governance which can achieve the level of consensus that a democracy brings to the table. Remember that things accomplished through a wide consensus cannot be easily undone, unlike dictates from a single 'ruler' or 'party'.

 

[gubbi]

Democracy is also good on paper, why is power only concentrated on a few families (India, Singapore, Japan, The Philippines, etc. etc.) And why people do not having any says? For instance, majority of US citizens want to stop the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. For instance GWBush was not supported by majority population. For instance, ordinary people want to punish Wall Street alligators for messing up the economy…
Got no answer?

You sir, dont know how democracy works. Period. Your illogical biased rantings pretty much sum up your knowledge. You are confusing a democractic process with problems with governance or economics.

"If democracy is a farce", don't attempt to lie in the public as some democracy advocates, I said “your democracy”, not “democracy”.
Get your literacy?

Lol. There is no such thing as "your democracy" or "our democracy". Period. You sir, need a crash course in "Democracy for Dummies". Again I repeat my question, if you think democracy is a farce, please suggest a better alternative method of governance where peoples rights are respected.

 

[lem34]

You sir, dont know how democracy works. Period. Your illogical biased rantings pretty much sum up your knowledge. You are confusing a democractic process with problems with governance or economics.

Lol. There is no such thing as "your democracy" or "our democracy". Period. You sir, need a crash course in "Democracy for Dummies". Again I repeat my question, if you think democracy is a farce, please suggest a better alternative method of governance where peoples rights are respected.

You are not witty mate grow up and stop trolling

 

[ashokdeiva]

You are not witty mate grow up and stop trolling

Come on Aryan, you need to provide a valid answer for his question. What is the best alternative system where peoples rights are respected

 

[zoochee]

​

Efficiency is probably the last thing you can associate with Democracy, you can spin it for fairness or even just although I haven't yet to see that in the Indian version but I will give it the benefit of doubt. But efficiency? come on!

Nobody ever said Democracy is perfect. But its the closest that comes for efficient governance - with all people getting onboard being happy with the power they wield. That is the important point there that many tend to miss or overlook.

Show me another method of governance which can achieve the level of consensus that a democracy brings to the table. Remember that things accomplished through a wide consensus cannot be easily undone, unlike dictates from a single 'ruler' or 'party'.

 

[lem34]

Come on Aryan, you need to provide a valid answer for his question. What is the best alternative system where peoples rights are respected

Ashokbhai to be honest I think that none of the methods or systems of governance we have are in anyway perfect. I like bits about the american idea of democracy but I think they go too far in their reverence of material things. I admire the chinese in that they have managed to eradicate illiteracy compared to india or pakistan yet started at the same time as us. Maybe some of the scandanavian countries welfare govnts? I abhor the idea of just basing it on popularity cos simply the masses are sometimes wrong and in pakistan and india sometimes easily manipulated by corrupt politicos. I would like a system that is fair, that cares about its peoples welfare, listens to its people follows but also leads. I think maybe a mixture of all. But simple democracy as in the west no way. I mean in pakistan we have feudals who command massive vote banks. You have people in india that will vote for people because an italian woman tells them where to vote. This can not be right.

btw gubbi wasnt asking me lol

 

[huzihaidao12]

Nobody ever said Democracy is perfect. But its the closest that comes for efficient governance - with all people getting onboard being happy with the power they wield. That is the important point there that many tend to miss or overlook.

Show me another method of governance which can achieve the level of consensus that a democracy brings to the table. Remember that things accomplished through a wide consensus cannot be easily undone, unlike dictates from a single 'ruler' or 'party'.

Well, I do not see a good thing for democracy in developing countries, if I'm wrong, please correct me. As for the developed countries, leaving aside some of the things, in a sense I agree with you, after all, there are also some of the real thing about democracy in developed countries.

I do not think that really there is a consensus, or rebellion, or just the spirit of narcotics, India is a good example, then there really a consensus?

 

[huzihaidao12]

You sir, dont know how democracy works. Period. Your illogical biased rantings pretty much sum up your knowledge. You are confusing a democractic process with problems with governance or economics.

Lol. There is no such thing as "your democracy" or "our democracy". Period. You sir, need a crash course in "Democracy for Dummies". Again I repeat my question, if you think democracy is a farce, please suggest a better alternative method of governance where peoples rights are respected.

If we consider the East Asian model of success, this is a crash course, first of all concentrate on economic development in an authoritarian phase, when the economy improved, industrialization, improve the quality of the people, to reform, then the people some of the real rights, which is a realistic example, regardless of anything else, at least more real than all developing democracy countries.

---------- Post added at 10:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 PM ----------

I asked a question, what do you expect for your country, you are for democracy then to democracy? Your purpose is not to make your country better?

 

[ashokdeiva]

Ashokbhai to be honest I think that none of the methods or systems of governance we have are in anyway perfect. I like bits about the american idea of democracy but I think they go too far in their reverence of material things. I admire the chinese in that they have managed to eradicate illiteracy compared to india or pakistan yet started at the same time as us. Maybe some of the scandanavian countries welfare govnts? I abhor the idea of just basing it on popularity cos simply the masses are sometimes wrong and in pakistan and india sometimes easily manipulated by corrupt politicos. I would like a system that is fair, that cares about its peoples welfare, listens to its people follows but also leads. I think maybe a mixture of all. But simple democracy as in the west no way. I mean in pakistan we have feudals who command massive vote banks. You have people in india that will vote for people because an italian woman tells them where to vote. This can not be right.

btw gubbi wasnt asking me lol

Brother, I concur with what you say in the above post at most of the places, but Democracy does not advocate that a few rule the masses with the vote bank, Decocracy is a form of governance for the masses that is patient and willing to learn. Look at INDIA, we have a strong and stable government, yet a single Man Anna Hazare has proved the entire world that the people are boss. Democracy when introduced in a country in the begining for about say 50 to 70 years will be dominated by rich and elite class, but people slowly gain on with the system and become part of a governance that most people listen and talk for a concensus.
where as Communism or Dictatorship lead by a wise team might go againt the wishes of the people and chaose might errupt beneth.

Don't you agree on what I have said above?

 

[gambit]

Interesting point, gentlemean.

Most of this love of democracy comes from the infatuation people had with ancient greece.

Plato, widely believed to be a great proponent of democracy, thought of democracy as a second best system.

He thought the best system was rule by a single 'wise' or 'enlightened' person.

My two paisa...

Let us know when Pakistan find that person.