On 2006-Aug 05, at 21:29hrs PM, Gerhard Fiedler wrote: Gus S Calabrese wrote: > Are you saying democracy works ? I say it is terribly flawed, > full of > lies and does not work. I agree. I think it's a learning process (to learn to think and feel also as a group, not only as individuals), and it may take a while. And when (or if) we have learned that, as a species, there will be other, probably better, options. But until then, you have so far failed to present any other option besides enjoying the benefits of a rather stable democracy while not participating in creating them. IMO that's one of the behaviors why it doesn't work. As I said, it'll take some time... ^ you imply I am not doing anything and just enjoying benefits that someone else laid on me. Not true I am working to reverse the tide and replace " stable democracy " with something much better. I believe I could talk until I dropped dead and drag out easels with diagrams and pie charts until heaven burnt over and I could not get you to see that something has already existed that was better than what exists now. A Constitutional Republic ! Yes, in the era of 1776, many of the thinkers in the US at that time were striving for a republic that guaranteed freedom and protection of property including your own body. The US was not created to make voting sacred. It was not created to make voting machine companies profitable. It was not created to set an example to the world of democracy. It was created to encourage and protect freedom and the sacredness of property. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. " "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. " AGSC^ > Of course it depends on your definition of democracy. And which > governments you include as democracies. Was Germany 1940 a > democracy in > your opinion ? 1940 probably not anymore. 1932 probably still. But that's not the question. The question is not whether it can fail, the question is whether it can work if you do it right -- and how to do it right. Just tell me you have never blown a transistor. Yet you still continue to use transistors. You didn't say "oh well, that thing just blows" and never used it again -- you learned how to use it properly. And you started to realize that if used properly, it might just do something useful. ^ the analogy you present has nothing to with what is happening in the real world right now Systems that worked from 1776 through the early 1800's and into the 1900's are being dismantled now in the name of ' protect the USA from terrorists ' Those systems would work quite well now, if reactivated. AGSC^ >>> I do not want their mob to rule nor do I want mine to rule. I am not >>> wise enough to make choices for others. >> >> It's not about choices, it's about (violent) power. /Somebody/ >> will use >> it. Either you have enough on your own (the red button in your living >> room?) or you have to get together with a few people to accumulate >> some >> power, so that you can keep the others from using it against you. >> Those >> few people is then a "mob" already... > <---- this paragraph is the belief system you base your life on ? Nope. It's observation, not a belief system. Have you experience of living in a country with a weak government, much weaker than the US government? Whether I believe that it is too strong or not is not the point. But the current experience shows what correlates with too weak a government. Look around for countries with weak governments, and tell me whether you find a place that you would like (in terms of government and public administration). >> BTW, I don't think the weapon carrying laws have a big influence on >> that. Hand gun violence is so last century :) This is not about High >> Noon type encounters. Violence has many forms, and carrying a gun >> doesn't help much against most. ^ Well, yes carrying a gun does >> protect against most forms of violence. One area where a gun fails to do much good is against a large group of government backed thugs. ^ > <--- Are you saying here that you have surrendered and are awaiting > orders from your betters ? Did I say that? Read again... :) >> Don't forget that you're talking from a place that's nicely >> secured all >> around by "the mob". Just look around a bit, and you see plenty >> examples how a mob without democracy can look like. > > Hmmm I guess you refer to the middle east. Wrong guess. Plenty of places outside of the Middle East with weak governments. I happen to live in one. > I appears to me that the USA "surrounds" everyone else with their > killer-good do-bees. I didn't understand this phrase. > ( Ever watch romper room ? ) And neither this one. >> (From another message of yours) >>> ^3^ Abolish voting for most things ( 98%) Give representatives >>> decision making power over the remaining 2%. >> >> Representatives become representatives how? Through voting? Chosen by >> the "wise five"? :) > > Well yes you are right.... I will eliminate the 2% Everybody doing his own, in peace... the nice version of anarchy. I'm pretty sure that if it worked, democracy would also work -- because it depends on people really wanting to live together in peace. Which happens to be the base of a working democracy, too. The difficulties we have in making democracy work reasonably well show that anarchy never would work. Who would protect you from the real mob (the mafia type) taking over your home, just because it's at a good location? Not your weapons, that's for sure -- they have the better ones, and they are more. (Remember? You don't want a group, you're alone.) ^ <---- I never said that, never, ever, you made that up completely on your own. Living alone was never a stated, implied or desired agenda on my part. Please tell me where you came up with the idea that want to depend only on myself. ^ Anarchy is the /real/ mob rule -- not one single mob, but only mobs. No place for lone rangers. These, even though they pride themselves on their loner status, only can be what they are because they are protected (more or less, it could definitely be better) by the "democracy mob". The frontier times are gone, mostly, and people are everywhere. You better get used to it :) ^ <-------- you are completely making up things about what I said, .... what am I to do ? And you do not understand the various forms of anarchy that are possible. There is not just one form, just as there is not one implementation of democracy. You have picked a form of anarchy that sounds like it occurs every day in Washington D.C. Not my kind of anachy. So do you want to hear more, or should I give up ? AGSC^ Gerhard -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist Gus S Calabrese Denver, CO 720 222 1309 303 908 7716 cell Please include and do not limit yourself to "spam2006". I allow everything with "spam2006" in the subject or text to pass my spam filters. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist