The Problems of Democracy

[The East Marches II]

With an extremely selective ability to become a citizen. Calling that democracy is generous to say the least. Athens gets all the credit while Rome doesn't get its due spot. Daily Reminder: Corinth had it coming

You're confusing democracy with universal suffrage.
The United States didn't have universal suffrage and until both women and African-Americans could also vote.

You're confusing democracy with an oligarchy :^)

We were supposed to be like ourselves.

[Genivaria]

You're confusing democracy with universal suffrage.
The United States didn't have universal suffrage and until both women and African-Americans could also vote.

You're confusing democracy with an oligarchy :^)

We were supposed to be like ourselves.

The United States before the civil rights movement was a democracy.
I don't think you know what oligarchy means.

[The East Marches II]

You're confusing democracy with an oligarchy :^)

We were supposed to be like ourselves.

The United States before the civil rights movement was a democracy.
I don't think you know what oligarchy means.

The Founding Fathers restricted based on wealth as well if I remember correctly. Oligarchy is a small group running the country. How is a small fraction of a state's wealthiest running the show not an Oligarchy? Our best guess is 10% to 20% of Athens could "vote". Of those, 3000 were actually active and had extreme influence usually due to their wealth. You are merely arguing semantics.

Athens is way overrated and belongs in the trash.

[NeuPolska]

Go look at the policies of every single monarchy in existance now. There are protocols which prevent outright abuse of power like that and if he is truly crazy then he would not be legitimate and therefore holds no power. He can't order executions if no one takes him seriously. It's a ridiculous scenario to begin with, to say the least.

You mean the constitutional monarchies that are extremely democratic?
Those?

I was never arguing against democracy per say in my entire time on this thread. What I have been arguing since the start is that democracy involving only elected officials is flawed, and so the best democracy would be a constitutional monarchy.

[Genivaria]

The United States before the civil rights movement was a democracy.
I don't think you know what oligarchy means.

The Founding Fathers restricted based on wealth as well if I remember correctly. Oligarchy is a small group running the country. How is a small fraction of a state's wealthiest running the show not an Oligarchy? Our best guess is 10% to 20% of Athens could "vote". Of those, 3000 were actually active and had extreme influence usually due to their wealth. You are merely arguing semantics.

Still democracy, there wasn't some small elite group.

You are merely arguing semantics

I find this projection amusing though.

[Genivaria]

You mean the constitutional monarchies that are extremely democratic?
Those?

I was never arguing against democracy per say in my entire time on this thread. What I have been arguing since the start is that democracy involving only elected officials is flawed, and so the best democracy would be a constitutional monarchy.

Like modern UK CM or American Revolution CM?

[The East Marches II]

The Founding Fathers restricted based on wealth as well if I remember correctly. Oligarchy is a small group running the country. How is a small fraction of a state's wealthiest running the show not an Oligarchy? Our best guess is 10% to 20% of Athens could "vote". Of those, 3000 were actually active and had extreme influence usually due to their wealth. You are merely arguing semantics.

Still democracy, there wasn't some small elite group.

You are merely arguing semantics

I find this projection amusing though.

10% of the population isn't a small elite? By your definition, Assad's Syria is a democracy! Any state with a bit voting counts. I supposed you'd count the SU for its voting too. 10/10

[NeuPolska]

I was never arguing against democracy per say in my entire time on this thread. What I have been arguing since the start is that democracy involving only elected officials is flawed, and so the best democracy would be a constitutional monarchy.

Like modern UK CM or American Revolution CM?

I prefer a system like that of Liechtenstein or even the Netherlands, the British monarchy is a bit too ceremonial.

[Genivaria]

Still democracy, there wasn't some small elite group.

I find this projection amusing though.

10% of the population isn't a small elite? By your definition, Assad's Syria is a democracy! Any state with a bit voting counts. I supposed you'd count the SU for its voting too. 10/10

Yes, actually it is by definition.
Look I'm sorry that you don't get what words mean but that's hardly my fault.

[The East Marches II]

10% of the population isn't a small elite? By your definition, Assad's Syria is a democracy! Any state with a bit voting counts. I supposed you'd count the SU for its voting too. 10/10

Yes, actually it is by definition.
Look I'm sorry that you don't get what words mean but that's hardly my fault.

Wow, you went balls out on that one. Listen I don't have to defend that but I do wish you the best of luck in that endeavour.

[The East Marches II]

By your logic, a military junta that votes on what to do between members is a democracy too. I'll see you in the Pinochet threads :^)

[Genivaria]

By your logic, a military junta that votes on what to do between members is a democracy too. I'll see you in the Pinochet threads :^)

By MY logic that's called an oligarchy, I'm unsurprised at this point that you don't know the difference.

[Genivaria]

Yes, actually it is by definition.
Look I'm sorry that you don't get what words mean but that's hardly my fault.

Wow, you went balls out on that one. Listen I don't have to defend that but I do wish you the best of luck in that endeavour.

Bye then.

[The East Marches II]

Wow, you went balls out on that one. Listen I don't have to defend that but I do wish you the best of luck in that endeavour.

Bye then.

Good bye friendo :^)

[The East Marches II]

By your logic, a military junta that votes on what to do between members is a democracy too. I'll see you in the Pinochet threads :^)

By MY logic that's called an oligarchy, I'm unsurprised at this point that you don't know the difference.

But it has voting so by your previous posts it counts as a democracy. Even if it's just 3 members. You can't even keep a straight personal definition much less follow the dictionary one on the matter.

[Genivaria]

By MY logic that's called an oligarchy, I'm unsurprised at this point that you don't know the difference.

But it has voting so by your previous posts it counts as a democracy. Even if it's just 3 members. You can't even keep a straight personal definition much less follow the dictionary one on the matter.

No sorry putting words in my mouth isn't an argument.

Here's some definitions for you.

-democracy
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

-oligarchy
noun
a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution.

See the difference?

[The American Commonwealth]

Yes, by definition, republics are an oligarchy (definition #1, or sometimes #2), but a representative republic is a nation ruled by the people; you speak by who you vote for. If you vote for candidate A, a communistic authoritarian, you say that you believe in authoritarian communism. If you vote for candidate B, a capitalistic libertarian, you believe in capitalism and libertarianism. In an authoritarian state, you don't get to choose who rules you. The General-Secretary in Moscow didn't care if you were a capitalist libertarian.

though, maybe he did. Gotta use all that empty land for someone.

At the same time, Hitler hunted you down for your communist beliefs. And what happened to both of these types of government? They were whipped off the map. Dead in history. As for the great American experiment? It's the most powerful nation in the world. It still stands after 240 years, compared to the USSRs 69 years and Nazi Germanys 12. It's because authoritarianism doesn't work for the long term. Yes, maybe the short term (hell, Mussolini was named Man of the Year) but never in the long term. Yes, there are exceptions like North Korea (well, that most likely won't last much longer) but democracy creates long-lasting and free nations.

[Vallermoore]

The problems are-1, there are far too many people for true democracy, and 2, it's weakness when confronted with terrorists. It's free media reports the crimes of the terrorists and gives the terrorists the attention they want.

[The East Marches II]

But it has voting so by your previous posts it counts as a democracy. Even if it's just 3 members. You can't even keep a straight personal definition much less follow the dictionary one on the matter.

No sorry putting words in my mouth isn't an argument.

"What I say doesn't count"

You defend both Athens and Assad's Syria as democracies when they were/are both oligarchies. Yet when the number is reduced to 3 Generals versus a Ba'ath party meeting or "citizens", you make an exception. Why?

Those definitions support my point by the way. It is you who can't see the difference.

[Genivaria]

Yes, by definition, republics are an oligarchy (definition #1, or sometimes #2), but a representative republic is a nation ruled by the people; you speak by who you vote for. If you vote for candidate A, a communistic authoritarian, you say that you believe in authoritarian communism. If you vote for candidate B, a capitalistic libertarian, you believe in capitalism and libertarianism. In an authoritarian state, you don't get to choose who rules you. The General-Secretary in Moscow didn't care if you were a capitalist libertarian.

though, maybe he did. Gotta use all that empty land for someone.

1. The link you provide doesn't actually prove what you say.
2. Yes the Soviet Union not only seized land from anyone who owned private property but also arrested many people who were labeled "intellectuals".

Capitalist Libertarians in Russia after the Bolsheviks took power very quickly emigrated or died.

[Genivaria]

No sorry putting words in my mouth isn't an argument.

"What I say doesn't count"

You defend both Athens and Assad's Syria as democracies when they were/are both oligarchies. Yet when the number is reduced to 3 Generals versus a Ba'at party meeting or "citizens", you make an exception. Why?

Those definitions support my point by the way. It is you who can't see the difference.

"No you" also not an argument.

Those definitions support my point by the way

de·moc·ra·cy
dəˈmäkrəsē/Submit
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Please continue.

[The East Marches II]

"What I say doesn't count"

You defend both Athens and Assad's Syria as democracies when they were/are both oligarchies. Yet when the number is reduced to 3 Generals versus a Ba'at party meeting or "citizens", you make an exception. Why?

Those definitions support my point by the way. It is you who can't see the difference.

"No you" also not an argument.

Those definitions support my point by the way

de·moc·ra·cy
dəˈmäkrəsē/Submit
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Please continue.

So the 3 generals being the only eligible members of the state count as a democracy then. I'm just using your reasoning. That's totally ignoring the oligarchy definition.

[Genivaria]

"No you" also not an argument.



Please continue.

So the 3 generals being the only eligible members of the state count as a democracy then. I'm just using your reasoning. That's totally ignoring the oligarchy definition.

*sigh* You are really desperate to not get this aren't you?
At this point I honestly think you are just being argumentative for the sake of it.

[The American Commonwealth]

Yes, by definition, republics are an oligarchy (definition #1, or sometimes #2), but a representative republic is a nation ruled by the people; you speak by who you vote for. If you vote for candidate A, a communistic authoritarian, you say that you believe in authoritarian communism. If you vote for candidate B, a capitalistic libertarian, you believe in capitalism and libertarianism. In an authoritarian state, you don't get to choose who rules you. The General-Secretary in Moscow didn't care if you were a capitalist libertarian.

though, maybe he did. Gotta use all that empty land for someone.

1. The link you provide doesn't actually prove what you say.
2. Yes the Soviet Union not only seized land from anyone who owned private property but also arrested many people who were labeled "intellectuals".

Capitalist Libertarians in Russia after the Bolsheviks took power very quickly emigrated or died.

Well I was just providing the definition to the world oligarchy. It wasn't meant to prove anything.

[Genivaria]

1. The link you provide doesn't actually prove what you say.
2. Yes the Soviet Union not only seized land from anyone who owned private property but also arrested many people who were labeled "intellectuals".

Capitalist Libertarians in Russia after the Bolsheviks took power very quickly emigrated or died.

Well I was just providing the definition to the world oligarchy. It wasn't meant to prove anything.

Gotcha.