[marden]

Maybe Democracy Doesn't Work

If our freedoms have allowed us to produce conditions and people such as we now have who would so easily, readily and naively give up our freedoms or fall prey to threats such as CALCIUM's which would overthrow our government and our freedoms, then maybe democracy doesn't work after all.

Maybe we should just surrender now and avoid the bloodshed or else have the government really institute marshall law just when the country is about to fall victim to our folly.

Imagine Americans cheering a foreign leader who comes here and insults our President.

Maybe Democracy should only be granted to those who can pass a test of some kind.

The ones who can't pass the test would be denied the rights of everyone else. They shouldn't complain as they were willing to give away their rights anyway or let them be taken.

[Nicko]

So in your version of democracy people who freely vote for their leaders aren’t allowed to criticize them? Interesting…

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

So in your version of democracy people who freely vote for their leaders aren’t allowed to criticize them? Interesting…

Sure they are, but even wild animal pups know enough to be still and quiet when predators are nearby. We don't have that instinct or intelligence, or the people who welcome Chavez don't.

And what they are doing isn't smart for them or the rest of the population.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Nicko

So in your version of democracy people who freely vote for their leaders aren’t allowed to criticize them? Interesting…

nononono. They'd only be not allowed to criticize Republican leaders.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by marden

Maybe Democracy should only be granted to those who can pass a test of some kind.

And what would that test be? Voting against the party in power (the ultimate criticism), perhaps?

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

nononono. They'd only be not allowed to criticize Republican leaders.

oooooooooooooooohh I get it now

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by marden

Maybe we should just surrender now and avoid the bloodshed…

Surrender to whom?

Originally Posted by marden

or else have the government really institute marshall law just when the country is about to fall victim to our folly.

Yeah, that's a good idea.

Originally Posted by marden

Maybe Democracy should only be granted to those who can pass a test of some kind.

And that "test" would involve blind obedience to a leader and unquestioned authority?

LOL - that sounds like you're testing people's predisposition towards fascism, not democracy.

[saddino]

Originally Posted by marden

Imagine marden cheering Cody Dawg who comes here and insults our President.

Fixed, unfortunately.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

And what would that test be? Voting against the party in power (the ultimate criticism), perhaps?

Question #1

If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%, the best way to guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms is to:

A. Protest more.
B. Protest less.
C. Praise and encourage leaders from hostile nations who insult our President.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Surrender to whom?

Yeah, that's a good idea.

And that "test" would involve blind obedience to a leader and unquestioned authority?

LOL - that sounds like you're testing people's predisposition towards fascism, not democracy.

You've already failed.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

Question #1

If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%, the best way to guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms is to:

A. Protest more.
B. Protest less.
C. Praise and encourage leaders from hostile nations who insult our President.

Uh, just look at what happened in Thailand last week. The Thai PM was waging a bloody and losing war in the south of the country so the military stepped in (with public backing) and fired him in a bloodless coup. Now, short of having a coup, the only way to change things in a free society is to speak out about it.

--

Also what is happening in Hungary this week is another example.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by marden

Question #1

If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%, the best way to guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms is to:

A. Protest more.
B. Protest less.
C. Praise and encourage leaders from hostile nations who insult our President.

[If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%] has no direct connection with [guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms]

What if the President has manufactured a war for the sole purpose of convincing people not to vote against him?

[marden]

Originally Posted by saddino

Fixed, unfortunately.

Saddino, it seems like you are giving too much credit to the former President. Just because he was quite popular doesn't mean that criticizing him will jeopardize our national security.

Whereas, criticizing a current president is quite foolhardy during wartime when a smart enemy can use that show of dissatisfaction to his favor. And it is traitorous.

In the Godfather, Sonny's remark in the meeting when Don Vito declined to cooperate with Sollazo's drug deal resulted in the attempt on the Godfather's life, the death of Sonny and Carlo and Apollonia and many other deaths and untold suffering for dozens more.

One careless remark suggesting a lack of support for a decision.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

Saddino, it seems like you are giving too much credit to the former President. Just because he was quite popular doesn't mean that criticizing him will jeopardize our national security.

Whereas, criticizing a current president is quite foolhardy during wartime when a smart enemy can use that show of dissatisfaction to his favor. And it is traitorous.

In the Godfather, Sonny's remark in the meeting when Don Vito declined to cooperate with Sollazo's drug deal resulted in the attempt on the Godfather's life, the death of Sonny and Carlo and Apollonia and many other deaths and untold suffering for dozens more.

One careless remark suggesting a lack of support for a decision.

The mafia is not a democracy. Try again.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

Uh, just look at what happened in Thailand last week. The Thai PM was waging a bloody and losing war in the south of the country so the military stepped in (with public backing) and fired him in a bloodless coup. Now, short of having a coup, the only way to change things in a free society is to speak out about it.

--

Also what is happening in Hungary this week is another example.

Are you saying you think these situations are the same as ours?

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

The mafia is not a democracy. Try again.

You just officially proved you don't understand enough to pass the test. No democracy for you.

[Ron Goodman]

You're saying democracy is in trouble because a lot of people, foreign and domestic, think Shrub is an idiot?

[Wiskedjak]

Ah, now I understand the test: disagree with Abe and you fail.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by marden

Maybe Democracy Doesn't Work

If our freedoms have allowed us to produce conditions and people such as we now have who would so easily, readily and naively give up our freedoms or fall prey to threats such as CALCIUM's which would overthrow our government and our freedoms, then maybe democracy doesn't work after all.

Maybe we should just surrender now and avoid the bloodshed or else have the government really institute marshall law just when the country is about to fall victim to our folly.

Imagine Americans cheering a foreign leader who comes here and insults our President.

Maybe Democracy should only be granted to those who can pass a test of some kind.

The ones who can't pass the test would be denied the rights of everyone else. They shouldn't complain as they were willing to give away their rights anyway or let them be taken.

No, maybe you don't like democracy. This is not a reflection on its effectiveness but your state of mind.

When the chips are down democracy is pretty damn scary. It doesn't offer the same security a fascist government might. Is dissent wrong? Is free speech wrong if it doesn't say what I think is best for the nation? Should we really be allowed to "steer" a nation by electing our leaders? It would seem you'd rather have someone give you the answers. A visionary, a dictator.

I'm sorry but I will never sacrifice my freedoms in order to protect them.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

[If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%] has no direct connection with [guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms]

What if the President has manufactured a war for the sole purpose of convincing people not to vote against him?

If you lose the baby to any cause or for any reason the game is over.

And introduce those questions on your own test.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by marden

Question #1

If there is a war going on and your government and President is being excoriated in the press and the people are feeling discontent and the President's satisfaction polls are less than 40%, the best way to guarantee or maintain our Constitutional American freedoms is to:

A. Protest more.
B. Protest less.
C. Praise and encourage leaders from hostile nations who insult our President.

Precisely what is the point of a test to earn your freedoms if the test requires you to lose those very freedoms? Aren't you essentially just agreeing to a dictatorship for your own good?

And you know what, I could get behind a dictatorship really. Fascism is a beautiful system if you study it. The only singular problem is it requires the leader to be a perfect specimen of humanity. They would have to make Jesus look Saddam in order to have perfectly pure intentions. Sadly humans are notoriously weak. This is why dictatorships generally oppress their people to some degree and why we hold annual elections.

Oh and marden, you're crazy.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Ron Goodman

You're saying democracy is in trouble because a lot of people, foreign and domestic, think Shrub is an idiot?

I'm saying that when being attacked only those who would casually or ignorantly risk their freedom would give the enemy new opportunities to exploit.

CALCIUM used this week for their test run and the test was successful.

If you can't see it, you fail to qualify for democracy privileges.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by marden

You've already failed.

The test determining my predispostion towards fascist ideas? Good!

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

I'm saying that when being attacked only those who would casually or ignorantly risk their freedom would give the enemy new opportunities to exploit.

CALCIUM used this week for their test run and the test was successful.

If you can't see it, you fail to qualify for democracy privileges.

In other words, when you drink milk, you're supporting terrorism

[marden]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

No, maybe you don't like democracy. This is not a reflection on its effectiveness but your state of mind.

When the chips are down democracy is pretty damn scary. It doesn't offer the same security a fascist government might. Is dissent wrong? Is free speech wrong if it doesn't say what I think is best for the nation? Should we really be allowed to "steer" a nation by electing our leaders? It would seem you'd rather have someone give you the answers. A visionary, a dictator.

I'm sorry but I will never sacrifice my freedoms in order to protect them.

You seem hell bent on finding the outer limits of where Democracy might give way to exploitation.

A man was interviewing potential truck drivers to drive a dangerous mountain route.

Applicant #1: I can drive a foot from the edge and not fall down the mountain.

Applicant #2: I can drive an inch from the edge and not fall down the mountain.

Applicant #3: I stay as far away from the edge as possible.

#3 had the right idea.

If you insist on giving the enemies opportunities they can exploit one day you will find they have accommodated you. You don't think it can happen.

Tell us why not?

[Wiskedjak]

Obviously, if the intent of democracy is to ensure that the ideas and beliefs of one group are forced upon all the other groups, then yes, democracy doesn't work.

Fortunately, I don't think that's the intent of democracy

[marden]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

Precisely what is the point of a test to earn your freedoms if the test requires you to lose those very freedoms? Aren't you essentially just agreeing to a dictatorship for your own good?

And you know what, I could get behind a dictatorship really. Fascism is a beautiful system if you study it. The only singular problem is it requires the leader to be a perfect specimen of humanity. They would have to make Jesus look Saddam in order to have perfectly pure intentions. Sadly humans are notoriously weak. This is why dictatorships generally oppress their people to some degree and why we hold annual elections.

Oh and marden, you're crazy.

Oh and invisibleX, you shouldn't make ad hominum attacks.

Democracy can be attacked. It can be overthrown. It can be lost. If the people think the way to defend it is to just keep using it to tear down those who do defend it, the resulting loss of freedom is deserved by those so foolish.

But instead of ALL of us losing freedom because of knuckleheads I say that we all should earn or lose their freedoms individually. That way each one will get what he or she deserves. That's the ultimate in democracy.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by marden

Democracy can be attacked. It can be overthrown. It can be lost.

Especially if people stop being critical of their leaders. It's sad that you don't realize it, but what you are proposing here is an attack on democracy.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Obviously, if the intent of democracy is to ensure that the ideas and beliefs of one group are forced upon all the other groups, then yes, democracy doesn't work.

Fortunately, I don't think that's the intent of democracy

No, there would be no ideas that couldn't be held or expressed but the timing of expressing them when we are at war and the enemy comes in our own country and is greeted like a conquering hero by some is a sign of a giant leak in the dyke.

Anyone who would further embrace him or criticize Bush and provide our enemies with more proof that their next effort will be greeted with open arms would be helping increase the size of the hole in the dyke.

Those people do not understand freedom's demands and they would contribute to losing all of our freedoms for us because of their ignorance. A test would allow them to show they understand what makes a successful democracy. If they fail then they don't get to enjoy the same freedoms as the rest of us.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

Those people do not understand freedom's demands and they would contribute to losing all of our freedoms for us because of their ignorance. A test would allow them to show they understand what makes a successful democracy. If they fail then they don't get to enjoy the same freedoms as the rest of us.

So if Bush & Co call you up and tell you they are at war in Iran and Venezuela you will take up arms and sacrifice yourself without question?

[marden]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Especially if people stop being critical of their leaders. It's sad that you don't realize it, but what you are proposing here is an attack on democracy.

If you are endangering democracy by being ignorant or careless or foolish who do we blame after the fact? Where do we go to appeal? What court of last recourse is open to us?

There are things that can endanger a democracy. Agreed?

You know what I think those things are. What do you think can endanger a democracy?

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

So if Bush & Co call you up and tell you they are at war in Iran and Venezuela you will take up arms and sacrifice yourself without question?

Of course! I've been told I'm not eligible for re-enlistment. If they ever change their minds I'm ready to go.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

Of course! I've been told I'm not eligible for re-enlistment. If they ever change their minds I'm ready to go.

Maybe if you're lucky they'll draft you!

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

Maybe if you're lucky they'll draft you!

You aren't funny.

[Millennium]

Like parental licensing, this idea is awfully tempting. However, it suffers from the same fatal flaw: there is no fair and reliable way to formulate the tests that would be needed, and no test at all is better than a fundamentally-flawed one.

The following information is taken from Intellectual caste [email protected] and is about a Nevil Shute novel called "In the Wet". It describes a society where everyone has a right to vote, but there are ways to earn a greater say in politics. In total, a person can have up to seven votes, done as follows:

• The Basic vote, which every citizen received.
• The Education vote, given to those who studied to degree level.
• The Military Service vote (self explanatory).
• The Family vote, given to a couple who stayed together long enough to raise their children to adulthood.
• The Business vote given to employers, on the basis that in providing work for others they were contributing more to the country.
• The Travel vote, awarded to those who had lived and worked overseas, on the basis of the broader experience and knowledge they had gained.
• The Special vote, awarded only for instances of outstanding service to Queen and Country (Shute's Australia was still actively part of the British Empire).

Perhaps this is something a bit more to your liking?

[Jawbone54]

The ignorance and arrogance of the typical human being is what eventually kills a democrancy. When, out of several hundred million people, less than 50% is actually knowledgeable about current events and the political system, the system is bound to collapse.

When Americans are less concerned with Britney Spears' baby than we are about the policies of our government, then perhaps we can reverse our course. But that's not going to happen.

[Big Mac]

People have the right not to care about politics in America. We're probably better off that so much of the population isn't politically inclined. That's why I don't favor get out the vote campaigns. Clueless, ignorant people shouldn't be voting.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Like parental licensing, this idea is awfully tempting. However, it suffers from the same fatal flaw: there is no fair and reliable way to formulate the tests that would be needed, and no test at all is better than a fundamentally-flawed one.

The following information is taken from Intellectual caste [email protected] and is about a Nevil Shute novel called "In the Wet". It describes a society where everyone has a right to vote, but there are ways to earn a greater say in politics. In total, a person can have up to seven votes, done as follows:

Perhaps this is something a bit more to your liking?

The Basic vote, which every citizen received.
The Education vote, given to those who studied to degree level.
The Military Service vote (self explanatory).
The Family vote, given to a couple who stayed together long enough to raise their children to adulthood.
The Business vote given to employers, on the basis that in providing work for others they were contributing more to the country.
The Travel vote, awarded to those who had lived and worked overseas, on the basis of the broader experience and knowledge they had gained.
The Special vote, awarded only for instances of outstanding service to Queen and Country (Shute's Australia was still actively part of the British Empire).

Hahaha! I love it!

However it would cause as many problems as it would solve.

Define a family. (Uh oh!)
Define a business. ( )
Travel should only earn an extra half point. Some folks just travel as a virtue of their financial ability to afford it and there are some folks who've traveled extensively who are dumb as rocks.

If calm could be maintained during the first several years of such a plan and if certain segments of society didn't just drop out and become even more disaffected than they already are, I could see how such a plan could make America a better place and improve the quality of government.

But it would also coerce (impel) certain behaviors and also possibly create a permanent underclass.

The idea is a good one but it would need tweaking. How did it work out in the novel?

Back to my idea, I think a test actually could be successfully devised.

And I think it's important to make very clear so there is no one laboring under the wrong impression. I'll say this again...

The test would not be one of ideas or politics but one which tested the voter's knowledge re: the care and maintenance of a democracy and the responsibilities of the citizens of a democracy.

It's clear to me that some people must think the best way to protect our freedoms are to stress them to the limits. I don't believe that's the way to protect a democracy and keep it strong.

Maybe civics lessons on TV (the PSA's in between shows featuring network stars) are needed so we'll get on the same page and the people on the fringe can realize the danger of their actions.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Clueless, ignorant people shouldn't be voting.

The fact that Bush is serving a second term clearly shows that many are though.

[marden]

Most people know that when the oil is low in their car's engine they should not drive it until the proper oil level is restored. The bashers today act like the thing to do is to drive it harder and faster and hotter when it's low on oil. That's counterintuitive.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

The fact that Bush is serving a second term clearly shows that many are though.

This is not a thread about political ideology. Please pay attention to what is written and not what you THINK the topic is.

I believe people don't know how to care for or maintain a democracy. They have really strange ideas about what it takes to maintain our freedoms. During wartime you don't give the enemy your secrets. You don't do things to weaken your own government when fighting a war. You have to understand what war is about and why a government does and doesn't do certain things.

I truly believe there are people who do not grasp these concepts.

They don't deserve freedoms because they are doing things that absolutely contribute to losing all of us our freedoms.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by marden

Oh and invisibleX, you shouldn't make ad hominum attacks.

Democracy can be attacked. It can be overthrown. It can be lost. If the people think the way to defend it is to just keep using it to tear down those who do defend it, the resulting loss of freedom is deserved by those so foolish.

But instead of ALL of us losing freedom because of knuckleheads I say that we all should earn or lose their freedoms individually. That way each one will get what he or she deserves. That's the ultimate in democracy.

And you should stop using poorly constructed metaphors. I suppose we all have our flaws.

See, you don't have a very basic grasp of democracy to begin with and I haven't the time to educate you. Democracy is not simply a method to get freedom. Until you fully understand exactly what democracy does and why it is effective you will continue to assume democracy = freedom. The fact you're saying freedom must be defended by removing democracy should have probably tipped you off to some faulty logic.

No that is not the ultimate in democracy. Some dipshit unilaterally deciding that what is best for everyone is the very opposite of democracy. You are not free if you don't have equal rights. My lord you're worse than those damned iranians.

When do we start the detention camps for the people who aren't "worthy" of freedom? When do we start executing "dissidents"? Unity is just another word for one-man-rule to you.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by marden

This is not a thread about political ideology. Please pay attention to what is written and not what you THINK the topic is.

I believe people don't know how to care for or maintain a democracy. They have really strange ideas about what it takes to maintain our freedoms. During wartime you don't give the enemy your secrets. You don't do things to weaken your own government when fighting a war. You have to understand what war is about and why a government does and doesn't do certain things.

I truly believe there are people who do not grasp these concepts.

They don't deserve freedoms because they are doing things that absolutely contribute to losing all of us our freedoms.

I hate to break it to you but democracy is a political ideology. I suggest you stop playing the definitions-game if you don't own a dictionary.

Giving secrets to the enemy during wartime is called treason. However, disagreeing with your government during wartime is not. War is not an excuse for martial law. We don't put our freedoms on pause so some leader can go play war in the middle east.

We're all equal you dumbass. You keep ranting on and on how no one understand but you yet you can't even think about the basics of democracy. You want to switch to an oppressive system in order to fight wars to give other nations freedom from oppressive governments. Or maybe you really don't want to know why we're at war. Government knows best.

Sorry for blowing my top here. Its just a tad infuriating when someone comes in and says "Hey, you know what billions of people have died defending? Well why don't we ditch that rubbish democracy so I can feel secure."

[Ron Goodman]

All right, I'll bite. Other than as a political slogan, when did we go to war? I must have missed that declaration of war passed in Congress. I think many of us understand all too well what this "war" is about and why the government is doing "certain things". OBL and his minions can cause deaths and destroy property, and they have, but they have no political power to enforce any kind of change on us. It's hard to imagine how they would ever gain any. We have, on the other hand, given the current administration the political power to enforce all kinds of changes on our country, many of them for the worse, many having nothing to do with terrorism. So who is the greater threat to our democracy?

[marden]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

And you should stop using poorly constructed metaphors. I suppose we all have our flaws.

See, you don't have a very basic grasp of democracy to begin with and I haven't the time to educate you. Democracy is not simply a method to get freedom. Until you fully understand exactly what democracy does and why it is effective you will continue to assume democracy = freedom. The fact you're saying freedom must be defended by removing democracy should have probably tipped you off to some faulty logic.

No that is not the ultimate in democracy. Some dipshit unilaterally deciding that what is best for everyone is the very opposite of democracy. You are not free if you don't have equal rights. My lord you're worse than those damned iranians.

When do we start the detention camps for the people who aren't "worthy" of freedom? When do we start executing "dissidents"? Unity is just another word for one-man-rule to you.

Ad hominem attacks are bannable offenses.

You've been given fair warning.

If you actually read what I've written you will save all of us the time it takes to laugh at you after realizing you have missed the whole point of the thread.

You certainly wouldn't pass the part of the test which might measure reading comprehension.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

When do we start the detention camps for the people who aren't "worthy" of freedom? When do we start executing "dissidents"? Unity is just another word for one-man-rule to you.

"the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival."

[marden]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

I hate to break it to you but democracy is a political ideology. I suggest you stop playing the definitions-game if you don't own a dictionary.

Giving secrets to the enemy during wartime is called treason. However, disagreeing with your government during wartime is not. War is not an excuse for martial law. We don't put our freedoms on pause so some leader can go play war in the middle east.

We're all equal you dumbass. You keep ranting on and on how no one understand but you yet you can't even think about the basics of democracy. You want to switch to an oppressive system in order to fight wars to give other nations freedom from oppressive governments. Or maybe you really don't want to know why we're at war. Government knows best.

Sorry for blowing my top here. Its just a tad infuriating when someone comes in and says "Hey, you know what billions of people have died defending? Well why don't we ditch that rubbish democracy so I can feel secure."

You lack the ability to comprehend. But for what it's worth you've convinced us your a passionate, passionate man.

Too passionate.

Reported.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

"the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival."

When will some of you put your passions aside and deal with the real question?

This is not an encouraging sign.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by marden

When will some of you put your passions aside and deal with the real question?

This is not an encouraging sign.

From your first post it seems that you think people should take a 'democracy test' and if they pass they get democracy, if not they don't. Besides the fact that idea makes no sense and is completely illogical, your proposal is essentially an endorsment of fascism.

[besson3c]

Hey guys, I think I just figured out something!

marden is Abe/Aberdeenwriter/Mojo2!