Democracy, a universal value?

[Guest]

Quote[/b] ]Democracy, a universal value?, Or the doom of our civilization?

Why can't it be both things?

"Civilization" was perhaps the wrong term. What I meant was our western culture.

Also "value" is intrinsically something positive. While "doom" is negative.

Value is not intrinsically positive. There are "good" values, "bad" values, "family" values etc. Just like "ethics" or "morals" or "ideals" (not that they all mean exactly the same thing, but it's the same ballpark..) they do not have a positive/negative association...they are neutral words.

I don't want to pick your question to pieces Denoir, but perhaps you might wish to think a little more about the question, before providing any answers

[denoir 0]

It is indeed intrinsically positive relative the culture whose value it is. From an external perspective it is neutral, but not from an internal. Value comes from "valuable".

Quote[/b] ]val·ue

A principle, standard, or quality considered worthwhile or desirable.

And the whole point of this post is the issue of cultural relativity.

Don't worry about it. Think a bit more about the questions. I'm sure you'll get it sooner or later. You have spotted the essence of the questions, but you have not yet understood it.

[USSoldier11B 0]

I disagree, I think that a desire for civil liberties and rights is a basic need of the human race. I do not claim that democracy is for everyone, for there have been great monarchies in history. and socialism seems to be doing fine for smaller nations consisting of a somewhat homogenous cultural demography. Do not blame democracy for the woes in the world today, people have suffered much more under other forms of government. America is technically a Republic, as are most other democratic nations. One of the key elements of the U.S. Constitution is check and balance. If the founders agreed on anything as a whole it was that no one entity should have absolute power in the U.S. as to prevent tyrannical rule. However, changes in legislation and delegation of power has somewhat departed from the founder's concept of what America should be. Congress was intended to be the most powerful branch of government, since it is the most democratically elected body. For nearly 150 years it was just that, with the President serving merely as a "clerk" of Congress. Changes during the FDR administration have given rise to a much more powerful executive branch. Also liberal judicial activism has given rise to a much more powerful court system. However, the U.S. courts do not have much in the way of means to enforce their rulings, while most enforcement agencies belong to the executive bureaucracy. In the American political spectrum I would be considered a moderate conservative, I find many of your statements to be somewhat amusing being that they would be considered beyond the left and even right fringes of American thinking. If you go far enough on either wing you end up with anarchy, or the absence of government. I think this is foolish given the nature of men. I find it odd that so many European ultra-liberals agree with American liberalism since it's main scope it to expand federal control and increase the size of an already behemoth bureaucracy, which is turn, is the very bane of Marxist thinking. Is democracy a universal value? No, many people have absolutley no grasp of the idea. Is freedom? Yes, human beings are by nature self-interested and desire to make their own path.

[denoir 0]

I disagree, I think that a desire for civil liberties and rights is a basic need of the human race. I do not claim that democracy is for everyone, for there have been great monarchies in history. and socialism seems to be doing fine for smaller nations consisting of a somewhat homogenous cultural demography.

From your previous posts I have the feeling that you misuse the word "socialism". Could you give me an example of a modern socialist country?

Quote[/b] ]I find it odd that so many European ultra-liberals agree with American liberalism since it's main scope it to expand federal control and increase the size of an already behemoth bureaucracy, which is turn, is the very bane of Marxist thinking.

The funny thing is that American definitions of "conservative" and "liberal" are in many way twisted from their original meaning (referenced against their European origins). One more thing that adds to the confusion is the social component that exists in Europe, but not in USA. ("Social", not to be confused with "socialist" which is a completely different thing).

Just about every political party in Europe agrees on strong social politics (again, not socialist) which is the protection of the weaker in society. In practical terms that is social security, public healthcare etc. In America on the other hand this has a political conotation and is advocated by the left.

Quote[/b] ] Is democracy a universal value? No, many people have absolutley no grasp of the idea. Is freedom? Yes, human beings are by nature self-interested and desire to make their own path.

Are you sure about that? I know many people who under most circumstances like others to make choices for them. As a matter of fact, it is the basis of a representative democracy. We don't vote on every single detail - we choose people to decide for us.

[Gollum1 0]

human beings are by nature self-interested and desire to make their own path.

I disagree.

The Milgram "Shock" Experiment

I believe a large part (the majority?) of any society is destined to obey its superiors or even desire to be ruled on subconscious level. Sad, but true.

[walker 0]

Hi all

I hear that moronic crap about left right politics again; there is no such thing. Politics dont have a left a right it is taken from a visual representation in a 1D medium PICTURE ON PAPER! It does not even use the 2nd dimension available if they were to use the yin yang picture that would be more correct. but is still NOT REAL!

Sorry for shouting moddies.

Politics is an amorphus, dynamic system. Any picture you have of it and any labels you place on it such as Monarchy, Democracy, Socialist, Conservative, Liberal etc. are just models. When was the last time you flew in an airfix model of a plane? Yet you insist on confusing the model with reality.

Left Right descriptions of politics inevitabley leads to wrong conclusions. National Socialism Hitler etc. had left wing and right wing elements. Surely you can see that is true of any political group. If your going to use moron level 1D models of politics you can no more understand politics than the mithical 1D man in his 1D world.

Oh and USSoldier11B glad to see you have not left us but stop being paranoid about your country. Just because a few moronic imature young men blew up a bit of your country does not mean the whole world hates you. Your country is not that important its just another nation state. A tool for people to use to enhance their lives.

Kind Regards Walker

[Gollum1 0]

Just...calm...down........

[NurEinMensch 0]

Is freedom? Yes, human beings are by nature self-interested and desire to make their own path.

Man is a social animal. The need for social contacts and being part of a social group is at least as big as the desire for making the own way.

Being part of a social group is self-interested.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Walker you are a confusing dude....your statement was comforting yet at the same time irritating.