Reality of Democracy and Majority (Must watch)

[Manas]

^^^ Yes,power corrupts , absolute power (dictatorship) corrupts absolutely !!

Also its stupid to consider Democracy as rule of majority as being debated up teem times in the above videos.

In a true modern democracy e,g in India or the West ,the constitution assures certain fundamental rights to every citizens irrespective of race ,gender, religion ,caste ,economic status etc etc , that's unchangeable and not subject to whims of the majority .

E,g Indian parliament can't pass a legislation that prohibits religious conversion or calls Ahmadis are non Muslims as it will negate the fundamental right to freedom of religion which constitution guaranties .

 

[Chogy]

^^ Exactly. The U.S. Bill of Rights is another example. These fundamental rights are critical to prevent a phenomenon called "Tyranny of the Majority." Without fundamental rights, 51% of the population could literally enslave the other 49%

Something else worth mentioning... a TRUE democracy cannot exist at much above the village level. This means that every single person votes on every piece of legislation. This is impractical. Instead, we have parliamentary and/or representative democracies. We send an individual we trust to the central government to vote "for" us.

 

[*Awan*]

Well, you most probably converted to islam "after" the islamic rule and not before it. Most Indian christians can say they ruled us, but that will be funny to hear.

type "Awan" in google.

British did not force anybody to be democracy, they gave freedom to kings, and kings were pressurized to join one union or other. I am sure you know this, most of south asia is trying hard to be "democracy", not forced to be so.

you people dont have mental capacity to understand the big picture.

---------- Post added at 10:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:07 PM ----------

کہ از معز دو صد خر فکر انسا نی نمی آید


For the brains of two hundred donkeys cannot produce the wisdom of one man


تو نے کیا دیکھا نہیں مغرب کا جمہوری نظام
چہرہ روشن اندروں چنگیز سے تاریک تر


Hast thou not seen the Western democratic system
Whose face is bright but the inside is dark; darker than Changiz?



Allama Iqbal


"Jamhooriat wo tarz-e-hakoomat ha k jis mein...
Bandon ko gina jata ha, tola nahin jata..."

democracy is the way of ruling
in which men get counted but not weighted

(sorry for poor english)

 

[gambit]

Most people tend to overlook the inherent shortcomings of consolidating power under one person, by focusing on the immediate and short term goals. What appeals to people about dictatorship is supposed reduction in bureaucracy and quicker decision making. What most people don't realize is, when that dictator does something that is in opposition of what the population wants, then he will make that decision just the same way; with efficiency and little discussion and you will have a nation going in a completely different direction than what the populous wants.
Saddam and Gaddafi were great examples of leaders who did some positive things, which were completely overshadowed by the negatives that come along with allowing a nation to operate at the whim of one man. Democracy provides people with the opportunity to observe a leader at work and then either extend his term or dispose of him, depending on how he performs. Dictatorships don't allow any such opportunity. Even the most generous dictator will lose touch with his populous as he ages and a new generation comes to represent a nation...at which point, the true short comings of one man rule come into play.

Let me put it this way: The government that is most efficient at doing 'good' will also be equally efficient at doing 'bad'.

 

[*Awan*]

Ah yes, the "benign dictator" argument.

Good luck not only finding ONE genuine benign dictator, but importantly a succession of benign dictators. It's inevitable you're going to get a loser sooner rather than later, and the damage will be horrific.



How insulting.

how exactly?

Let me ask you something. You want to build an advanced aircraft. Do you...

A) hire one man to do it all? All the design, organizing?

or

B) Have a TEAM build the aircraft?

The collective wisdom of a team will almost always outperform one man.

wrong analogy.
in case aircraft.all people are qualified.they work in respective fields in which they have specialized.in democrazy they messed up things.in my country railway is going down,there are rats in airplanes.
fruits of democrazy

 

[*Awan*]

Most people tend to overlook the inherent shortcomings of consolidating power under one person, by focusing on the immediate and short term goals. What appeals to people about dictatorship is supposed reduction in bureaucracy and quicker decision making. What most people don't realize is, when that dictator does something that is in opposition of what the population wants, then he will make that decision just the same way; with efficiency and little discussion and you will have a nation going in a completely different direction than what the populous wants.
Saddam and Gaddafi were great examples of leaders who did some positive things, which were completely overshadowed by the negatives that come along with allowing a nation to operate at the whim of one man. Democracy provides people with the opportunity to observe a leader at work and then either extend his term or dispose of him, depending on how he performs. Dictatorships don't allow any such opportunity. Even the most generous dictator will lose touch with his populous as he ages and a new generation comes to represent a nation...at which point, the true short comings of one man rule come into play.

you watched all videos?
look i am not asking for a dictator but a complete new system,a system like of khilafte rashida.
if a dictator do good,then well and good but if he do wrong then people know who is the real culprit,who is responsible for their misery.before the arrival of democrazy (just few centuries ago) this world is running perfectly.look at chinese,persion and roman empires.but in todays world we are taught to believe that we cant breathe without democrazy.

my dear look at Pakistan.look at railway and pia,no electricity,gas,economy.in the name of democrasy dozen people die in karachi.in the name of democracy and greater good decision of supreme court is thrown into dustbin.
where is will and power of people now?
do you know these so called representatives of people do the investment of 50 million rs in order to get seat of provincial assembly,100 million rs for national assembly.
after that type of investment,what do you expect?what type of laws these clowns will?they will make laws to recover their investment or for your betterment?
look at the billion rs of corruption in rental projects,case of monis elahi.etc etc

 

[somebozo]

Well if real democracy exists;

The US will not be bankrupt today.
There would be no world wars
There would be no war in Iraq or Afghanistan. Off-course the US public voted against both.

So Democracy does not exist., it is a way to deceive and sway public opinion for imperial politics.

 

[*Awan*]

[/COLOR]

^^ Exactly. The U.S. Bill of Rights is another example. These fundamental rights are critical to prevent a phenomenon called "Tyranny of the Majority." Without fundamental rights, 51% of the population could literally enslave the other 49%

Something else worth mentioning... a TRUE democracy cannot exist at much above the village level. This means that every single person votes on every piece of legislation. This is impractical. Instead, we have parliamentary and/or representative democracies. We send an individual we trust to the central government to vote "for" us.

please try to understand and think by going beyond "oh you conspiracy theorist"
when every thing is free,fair and transparent why there is need of secret societies?
my dear sir when an uneducated person did crime the level of damage is limited and approach is simple,but when an educated and powerful person commit the crime the scale is huge and approach is very sophisticated.
few people/families control 90% wealth of your country.they are the people who give money to american govt on interest,they are the people who own banks,similarly they are the people who fund the think tanks like RAND and CFR.so that their policies get implemented.your member of congress are members of these think tanks,speaking from their platform is honor for them.
in order to make sure that a very specific type of people,people who support their policies would reach into congress they created the lobbies likes of AIPAC.same companies,same people fund the campaigns of your potential presidents.
ironically same people own the media.do you know 97% of the world media is owned by the 3 big companies/corporations?
so that they convince you people about their policies by implying different methods of brainwashing.so that you dont get frustrated.
and you idiots think that by pushing a button or use of stamp after every five year you have say in the policies of govt.