Always Neutral
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,859
- Reaction score
- -20
The trademark of a 'democratic' society is tolerance for diverse and even offensive speech -- with extremely few exceptions -- without resorting to violence. If there are those few exceptions, if there are violations of them, then those violations must be addressed by the government, not by mob justice. The ME have a long way to go towards democratic maturity.
Sorry to inject on your comments on this thread but your statement that "The trademark of a 'democratic' society is tolerance" is way of the mark. USA has been a democracy for 200+ years but had never been tolerant till the early 80's. True Tolerance does not come from democracy but from higher education and understanding which makes people seek peace. The education in the third world countries today just promotes fear, religious insecurity and intolerance similar to what prevailed in USA and UK in the 40-50's when blacks were not allowed to vote, women were attacked for trying to stand up for their rights. Having our long histories of intolerance behind us, was it right to enforce democracy by force/bombs in these countries maybe 20 years too early, the right approach by NATO? A question you studiously avoid answering on this forum. Saddam, Sadat, Quadaffi were products of their own countries (unlike Shah Of Iran) and we should have truly kept ourselves neutral then unleash our brand of freedom and democracy on people who just were not ready for it.