BombaUcigasa
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000
|
 |
June 13, 2011, 03:05:11 PM |
|
As far as I'm concerned, democracy always leaves a minority that is left to the whims and desires of the majority. Democracy is hardly a virtue.
It's better than the other way around, one might say... I say that! Sure you will find yourself most of the times in the majority, but would you want to live in a regime where the minority decides for the majority at all times? I prefer a society where people can act on their own individual desires and achieve them through their own virtues, not others by slavery. Anarchism or get really really rich or popular. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Make sure you back up your wallet regularly! Unlike a bank account, nobody can help you if you lose access to your BTC.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Basiley
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
June 13, 2011, 03:11:43 PM |
|
As far as I'm concerned, democracy always leaves a minority that is left to the whims and desires of the majority. Democracy is hardly a virtue.
It's better than the other way around, one might say... I say that! Sure you will find yourself most of the times in the majority, but would you want to live in a regime where the minority decides for the majority at all times? I prefer a society where people can act on their own individual desires and achieve them through their own virtues, not others by slavery. examples ?[of such societies] for reference. american indians ? somalian mobsters ? why/how would "individual desires" can/should contradict with importance of society-imposed/enforced slavery of any kind ? doesn't that's why people live in tribes/families/towns/nations ? itsn't that cooperation is form of slavery and eduction is form of brain destruction ? |
|
|
|
|
BombaUcigasa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 13, 2011, 03:25:49 PM |
|
I prefer a society where people can act on their own individual desires and achieve them through their own virtues, not others by slavery.
examples ?[of such societies] for reference. american indians ? somalian mobsters ? Exactly. The ideal society where people act on their own individual desires can take both forms. You need to factor in human rights and limitation of personal rights, such as: - gay people kiss in their bedroom - gay people kiss in the public - gay people kiss in the public using your face as a relay - gay people kiss in the public using your face as a relay while manhandling you to the ground |
|
|
|
|
Basiley
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
June 13, 2011, 03:46:03 PM
Last edit: June 14, 2011, 12:54:34 PM by Basiley |
|
actually enforcing anything "gay" strongly contradict with meaning of freedom here and anywhere else.
just as other forms of oppression[of non-gays. in particular case].
and thats why you example isn't good enough.
hardly public manifestation of something entirely private[like love]is anyway related to indication of individual freedom. plus, society had freedom too - to decide what is best for society in social/public places.
some countries already start complain about "gay tyranny" and US gay society-imposed US state pressure, in relatively harsh words.
point is, good compromise in both meaning of "good" is always works better than any degree of opression.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Guest
|
|
June 13, 2011, 04:32:55 PM |
|
As far as I'm concerned, democracy always leaves a minority that is left to the whims and desires of the majority. Democracy is hardly a virtue.
It's better than the other way around, one might say... I say that! Sure you will find yourself most of the times in the majority, but would you want to live in a regime where the minority decides for the majority at all times? I prefer a society where people can act on their own individual desires and achieve them through their own virtues, not others by slavery. why/how would "individual desires" can/should contradict with importance of society-imposed/enforced slavery of any kind ? They inevitably do. |
|
|
|
|
Basiley
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
June 13, 2011, 08:38:54 PM |
|
As far as I'm concerned, democracy always leaves a minority that is left to the whims and desires of the majority. Democracy is hardly a virtue.
It's better than the other way around, one might say... I say that! Sure you will find yourself most of the times in the majority, but would you want to live in a regime where the minority decides for the majority at all times? I prefer a society where people can act on their own individual desires and achieve them through their own virtues, not others by slavery. why/how would "individual desires" can/should contradict with importance of society-imposed/enforced slavery of any kind ? They inevitably do. they part of each others. like day and night, man and women, cat and mice. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jessica
|
|
June 23, 2011, 09:08:50 AM |
|
Just wondering. Are there any alternatives to democracy that are more fair / better or anything?
|
|
|
|
|
AntiVigilante
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
June 23, 2011, 09:57:33 AM |
|
Just wondering. Are there any alternatives to democracy that are more fair / better or anything?
Democracy is not a form of government. It is the health of government. Democracy answers the question "Who rules?" A republic is a form of government. It is the mechanism of government. A republic answers the question "How do they rule?" |
|
|
|
benjamindees
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 23, 2011, 10:15:26 AM |
|
A republic is a form of government. It is the mechanism of government. A republic answers the question "How do they rule?"
Since "rei publica" literally means "the public things", it actually answers the question "what do they rule?" |
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
|
|
|
AntiVigilante
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
June 23, 2011, 10:31:55 AM |
|
A republic is a form of government. It is the mechanism of government. A republic answers the question "How do they rule?"
Since "rei publica" literally means "the public things", it actually answers the question "what do they rule?" Even better. I sit corrected. |
|
|
|
muad_dib
Member
Offline
Activity: 140
Merit: 10
|
|
June 23, 2011, 10:39:40 AM |
|
The form of government doesn't matter. Economy matters.
That's why Bitcoin is revolutionary. |
|
|
|
|
|
riX
|
|
June 23, 2011, 10:52:50 AM |
|
In my opinion, the biggest flaw with democracy as it is commnly defined today, is that it allows people to vote even if they are not educated about the subject. If votes were weighted by the number of correct answers on some simple test questions about the subject, we would have a much better decision process.
Where I live, two very common reasons people give when asked about why the voted on some part in an election is "because I have always voted like that" and "because my parents / friends have always voted like that".
|
|
|
|
|
chickenado (OP)
|
|
June 23, 2011, 11:40:24 AM |
|
Just wondering. Are there any alternatives to democracy that are more fair / better or anything?
The concept of democracy is fundamentally immoral. It is better than monarchy but it inherits a lot of the evils of the monarchies that it replaced. I realize that complete anarchy may not be a realistic goal in our lifetime, but democracy should be reduced to a bare minimum. Eg. what you and I do with our bodies, or in our bedrooms, should not be decided democratically. |
|
|
|
|
|
riX
|
|
June 23, 2011, 11:46:49 AM |
|
Eg. what you and I do with our bodies, or in our bedrooms, should not be decided democratically. I agree as long as there is no secondary consequences for the democaratic community, ie. heightened, tax subventioned, healt care costs because you did something in private. |
|
|
|
|
chickenado (OP)
|
|
June 23, 2011, 11:50:02 AM |
|
In my opinion, the biggest flaw with democracy as it is commnly defined today, is that it allows people to vote even if they are not educated about the subject.
The biggest flaw isn't lack of an education, but lack of a personal stake in the issues that people cast votes on. Even the most uneducated person in the world would vote wisely, if he had to pay personally for cleaning up the damage of a failed policy that he voted for. |
|
|
|
|
|
chickenado (OP)
|
|
June 23, 2011, 12:03:54 PM |
|
I agree as long as there is no secondary consequences for the democaratic community,
The problem with this line of reasoning is that there always are secondary and tertiary consequences to every action you take. We live in a highly networked, complex economy. Everything you do has knock-on effects. A lot of them are counter-intuitive. Most are unknown or unknowable. For instance, smoking cigarettes may decrease the cost to the healthcare system because you die earlier, or it may increase the cost because the cancer rate increases. It's an ongoing debate among experts, yet government slaps on cigarette tax as if it was a proven fact that smoking creates a net cost to the "democratic community" You can't use this type of consequentialism as a basis for coercing people. Otherwise you end up in a police state where every tiniest of your actions is monitored and micromanaged. Food for thought: Governments ban cocaine because a considerable proportion of cocaine users end up dead or crippled. But so does a considerable proportion of motorcyclists. How come there isn't a War on Motorcycling? It's just arbitrary and ridiculous... |
|
|
|
|
AntiVigilante
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
June 23, 2011, 12:17:10 PM |
|
In my opinion, the biggest flaw with democracy as it is commnly defined today, is that it allows people to vote even if they are not educated about the subject. If votes were weighted by the number of correct answers on some simple test questions about the subject, we would have a much better decision process.
Where I live, two very common reasons people give when asked about why the voted on some part in an election is "because I have always voted like that" and "because my parents / friends have always voted like that".
Voting isn't about choosing the best answer. Voting isn't a test. Voting is the exercise of power. Christ, where are all the technocrats coming from this morning. |
|
|
|
|
riX
|
|
June 23, 2011, 12:30:24 PM |
|
Of course, there will always be unfairness independent of which system that is used. This is because it's impossible to satisfy every persons needs. The most common solution to this is to choose the solution that makes the most people get what they want. I did not say that what I proposed was optimal, but it is way better, in my opinion, to makes the most people get what they want weighted by how much they have thought through their decision, than just letting any idiot vote on issues that are way above his head. I won't go into the discussion about banning all potential hazardous activities, but I just want to comment that the ban on drugs is not primarily based on the health care costs, but the fact that even if drugs were legal, a lot of crimes would still be drug related. Voting isn't about choosing the best answer. Voting isn't a test. Voting is the exercise of power. It should be. The best answers to questions are what society need. Voting is excercise of power, but the problem is that the amount of power is equal between educated an non educated voters. Imagine a vote on the legality of bitcoin: Should people who have studied economics and the bitcoin system and understand it well have the same voting power as someone who have only read one single article full of wrong facts in some blog? |
|
|
|
|
Explodicle
|
|
June 23, 2011, 12:53:36 PM |
|
Futarchy. All the egalitarianism of democracy, achieved efficiently through capitalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bind
|
|
June 23, 2011, 06:12:54 PM |
|
Democracy is not a form of government. Nowhere in our founding documents does it state the word Democracy. Its a manipulation. Its otherwise known as Mob Rules. Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner. A Constitution-based federal republic is a well-armed sheep disputing the vote. That's our form of government.
Vladimir Lenin stated, "Democracy is indispensable to Socialism".
so no, democracy isnt the best form of government out there.
A democracy is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
