When it is done correctly, with the consent of the people.
I think you missed the point. I'm going to go out on a limb and use the shotgun method of throwing out ideas, hoping one rings true. Democracy is an incredibly inefficient government system, officials in a democracy spend money and make decisions like children since their decisions won't affect them once their terms run out as opposed to a monarch or dictator who plans decisions carefully and repay their debts (in the majority of cases), democracy is anti private property as it involves everyone telling you what you can and can't do with your land, democracy relies on an intelligent voting populace whereas the average voter won't be able to tell you the Bill of Rights, democracy is prone to hype and the herd mentality, to expand on the previous point: democracy doesn't make and keep long-term plans, democracy doesn't allow for speedy decisions to be made, democracy doesn't allow for needed but unwanted changes since politicians are constantly trying to keep their image up to be reelected, democracy is under the rule of big business and its lobbyists.
When it is done correctly, with the consent of the people.
I think you missed the point. I'm going to go out on a limb and use the shotgun method of throwing out ideas, hoping one rings true. Democracy is an incredibly inefficient government system, officials in a democracy spend money and make decisions like children since their decisions won't affect them once their terms run out as opposed to a monarch or dictator who plans decisions carefully and repay their debts (in the majority of cases), democracy is anti private property as it involves everyone telling you what you can and can't do with your land, democracy relies on an intelligent voting populace whereas the average voter won't be able to tell you the Bill of Rights, democracy is prone to hype and the herd mentality, to expand on the previous point: democracy doesn't make and keep long-term plans, democracy doesn't allow for speedy decisions to be made, democracy doesn't allow for needed but unwanted changes since politicians are constantly trying to keep their image up to be reelected, democracy is under the rule of big business and its lobbyists.
That's pretty much how I see it. Democracy is a wonderful thing if the people all do the right thing. If the people did the right thing then the Venus Project as posted up by Autumn would be a normal and accepted method of living a good, long life. Unfortunately, democracy is exactly like communism - a wonderful, egalitarian concept that works in theory but struggles desperately in the real world.
I think you missed the point. I'm going to go out on a limb and use the shotgun method of throwing out ideas, hoping one rings true. Democracy is an incredibly inefficient government system, officials in a democracy spend money and make decisions like children since their decisions won't affect them once their terms run out as opposed to a monarch or dictator who plans decisions carefully and repay their debts (in the majority of cases), democracy is anti private property as it involves everyone telling you what you can and can't do with your land, democracy relies on an intelligent voting populace whereas the average voter won't be able to tell you the Bill of Rights, democracy is prone to hype and the herd mentality, to expand on the previous point: democracy doesn't make and keep long-term plans, democracy doesn't allow for speedy decisions to be made, democracy doesn't allow for needed but unwanted changes since politicians are constantly trying to keep their image up to be reelected, democracy is under the rule of big business and its lobbyists.
That's pretty much how I see it. Democracy is a wonderful thing if the people all do the right thing. If the people did the right thing then the Venus Project as posted up by Autumn would be a normal and accepted method of living a good, long life. Unfortunately, democracy is exactly like communism - a wonderful, egalitarian concept that works in theory but struggles desperately in the real world.
Communism's past iterations failed ultimatly due to money screwing the entire system, also the sheer inefficiency of it. If you only need 4 people to count nails that roll off a converyer belt, you do *not* employ 30 people to do it. The Venus Project is taking the opposite approach, replace as many people as possible with machines and computers that are built to not wear out, along with infrastructure is is built as sturdy as possible to reduce maintenance. Also abolishing the concept of money entirely.
Seems more efficient in my eyes, but I'm sure it won't be able to be implemented without huge swaths of land to gain access to as many of the different types of resources imaginable, after all you wouldn't be able to interact with the outside world for economic reasons if your country doesn't have any money. Which is why the entire movement is based around getting the entire globe on this system.
Re: Egypt.............. « Reply #20 on Feb 15, 2011, 4:38pm »
Every governmental system fails to deliver the promised utopia because humans run it. Democracy is no different. However, the US Constitution is unique in that it protects the citizenry from the government which is why it is worded as a set of restrictions on the government and NOT on the people. By the way, it is the oldest surviving constitution in the world today.
People like to rip on democracy and its flaws but certainly can't come up with a better system.
As for Egypt - it is NOT a secular, moderate nation. It's female genital mutilation rate is one of the highest in the world (over 90%) and the latest Pew poll (available on the Pew site) has better than 70% favoring sharia law. Since most of you are classified as dhimmis you might want to find out what that means in terms of "moderate" Islam.
In addition, the protests were in part organized by the Muslim Brotherhood (source: WSJ and direct interviews with the protest organizers).
Food for thought: The Egyptian constitution is what kept Mubarak in power since Egyptian presidencies are for life. The Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Sadat for his peaceful approach to Israel and they tried to assassinate Mubarak no less than 6 times during his presidency. They were involved in organizing the protests that ultimately toppled him. To say the Brotherhood is a non-issue is about as "head-in-the-sand" as it can get.
Strange, isn't it, that the protests have sparked in Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, and Yemen - ALL western friendly governments.
Don't eat the news you're fed. Hunt it yourself and you'll be better informed.
As for Egypt - it is NOT a secular, moderate nation. It's female genital mutilation rate is one of the highest in the world (over 90%) and the latest Pew poll (available on the Pew site) has better than 70% .
That's like saying every male in the US is Jewish or Protestant for being circumcized. It's not a religious thing, it's cultural. Female circumcision dates back before the founding of Islam.
Joined: Apr 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 1,883 Location: The Mojave Waste Karma: 23
Re: Egypt.............. « Reply #22 on Feb 15, 2011, 7:07pm »
The protests were organized by the youth, the brotherhood played a small pert in it after it was already well underway. And they are a non-issue, they don't plan to have anyone run in the elections.
And it is by no means strange, the US has backed these governments for a while now and didn't want to topple them because of it. the government didn't want to lose a good thing.
Joined: Nov 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 555 Location: Australia Karma: 24
Re: Egypt.............. « Reply #23 on Feb 15, 2011, 7:14pm »
The information on the female genital mutilation rate in Egypt is speculative and typically based on reports from poorer citizens. Yes it was (and still is) practiced in rural areas and in some of the poorer slum areas of the cities but for the majority of city dwellers it's a thing of the past.
Re: Egypt.............. « Reply #24 on Feb 15, 2011, 7:46pm »
Female genital mutilation is studied by both UNICEF and Amnesty International and, of course, is not measured by asking every living person in a nation. If this is the measure by which we are allowed to have a discussion then we may as well quit not because NO information is valid by that standard. Yes, Egypt outlawed the practice - no, citizens didn't listen and it wasn't enforced. I don't know how anyone can say it isn't practiced in cities because the last time I was in Cairo (two years ago) there were doctors who advertised themselves as "advisors" to make sure the family member conducting the rite didn't botch it and cause infection. It was a running joke because it was supposedly "outlawed" a couple years earlier.
Female genital mutilation as practiced in Egypt, according to Amnesty International, differs from circumcision in that it goes beyond removing the clitoral hood, which is analogous to removing the foreskin. It is classified mutilation when all or part of the labia and/or clitoris itself is removed in order to reduce sexual pleasure. It usually includes the sewing together of the skin folds with a small hole left for urination. This would be more similar to removing all or part of the penis and then sewing the loose skin on the sack together to make sure you're uncomfortable. Again, I'm getting this from the people who actually went and looked, not what I heard third hand from some talking head on CNN or FOX who asked someone sympathetic to Islam. The Amnesty International definition can be found here: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/....70061997en.html
Just because the practice predates Islam does not mean it is a non-Islamic practice anymore than saying monotheism predates Islam therefore monotheism is not an Islamic belief. It's an adopted practice by a certain fundamentalist sector of Islamic practitioners in order to remove the sinful pleasure a woman may inadvertantly derive from making babies. This is philosophically in accord with the Islamic doctrine of removing sinful temptation - ala the burka. This is commonly practiced by both Shia and Sunni.
The Muslim Brotherhood, and this is why I gave you the source, was in on organizing the protests from the start. In order to reasonably refute the claim you need to either find fault in the source (personal interviews with the organizers by the reporter) or cite an alternate credible source. It's not simply good enough to say "that's not so." If you want to call the reporter a liar, ok.
Joined: Nov 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 555 Location: Australia Karma: 24
Re: Egypt.............. « Reply #26 on Feb 16, 2011, 6:24pm »
I spent a couple of months in Cairo in 2006 and amongst the people that I associated with there it was treated as a primitive and unnecessary procedure, they said that it was still rpacticed amongst the poor and lower middle classes. I found many Egyptians to be very welcoming and friendly and happy to talk about their country, traditions and culture and so on. However, I don't speak the language and I relied upon them to tell me the state of affairs so it's completely possible (and more than likely) they were telling me what they thought I wanted to hear.
This is philosophically in accord with the Islamic doctrine of removing sinful temptation - ala the burka. This is commonly practiced by both Shia and Sunni.
I'm about to tear this up horribly. The amount of women that wear the burqa is miniscule, so much to the point that women who wear it may as well be considered part of the Islamic Amish community. There are very few Islamic countries that mandate the wearing of the burqa, chiefly Iran and Saudi Arabia, and combined together only make up 5% of the world's Islamic population. There are more muslim countries that outlaw the veil than mandate it, namely because it doesn't say anywhere in the Qur'an that it is mandatory.
Also, I've heard, namely from muslim women who do wear the burqa, that it's not about removing sinful temptation, but rather saving their beauty for their husbands and family in direct contrast to Western customs of flaunting it.
The Muslim Brotherhood, and this is why I gave you the source, was in on organizing the protests from the start. In order to reasonably refute the claim you need to either find fault in the source (personal interviews with the organizers by the reporter) or cite an alternate credible source. It's not simply good enough to say "that's not so." If you want to call the reporter a liar, ok.
Here's a little something from the Washington Institute.
![[Home]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/home.png "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/newtopics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/help.png "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/search_menu.png "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/login.png "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/register.png "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/search.png "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://files.megaton.us.s3.amazonaws.com/images/forum/items/Share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://files.megaton.us/images/forum/items/print.png "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qLAIskTQXUc/THVCLvdNxDI/AAAAAAAACVI/g-H2HfqcOeM/s1600/tv-static-0607_thumb.jpg "[avatar]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://staticthumbs3.freewebs.com.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/THUMBS/47/ec/47ec0443bf7e26aba4992e2b2813c33a.png "[avatar]")
![[msn]](http://files.megaton.us.s3.amazonaws.com/images/forum/msn.gif "[msn]")
![[aim]](http://images.proboards.com/aim.gif "[aim]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/056/2/1/apocolypse_ponies_by_ishoka-d3ae1xr.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://gametrailers.mtvnimages.com/images/community/userimages/2031883-1280043796-fallout3avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[image]](http://i31.tinypic.com/2h3pzyo.png "[image]")