Is Democracy the solution to all problems?

[josephchoi]

I suppose so, in a way.

[lindieeluieee]

Watch Let's Make Money. Very insightful to the dirty jobs democratic countries carry out under the table.

[SharkSpider]

Watch Let's Make Money. Very insightful to the dirty jobs democratic countries carry out under the table.

This is about democracy, not capitalism. Two different debates there, though I don't see how exposing the corruption of certain capitalist governments brings anything new to either discussion topic...

[~Lc~]

What superb arrogance.

Thanks, I'm quite proud of it

I think most people misinterpret democracy with liberty, and what does solve most problems is liberty. But in religious communities, I don't see it happening without some form of self contradiction

[Capa]

This might sound like a harsh thing to say, but from a philosophical and theoretical point of view, I don't think democracy is the solution to most problems. First of all, democracy has to be defined. If a people can vote, but are exposed to propaganda, is that a democratic system? I would say no. However, the problem is that it is not possible to not be exposed to probaganda, so no place has a real democray.

Furthermore, if there was a place with real democracy, what if the people chose something that they thought would be a good policy but actually it is not? Then, something undemocratic but responsible government would be better.

IN THE USA, THEY ONLY HAVE A DEMO... THE REST IS JUST CRAZY!

Capa...

[Carsarefood]

Democracy isn't a means of solving anything.

The only reason democracy works is that, in the countries where democracies work, the people inside of them are solving matters. It doesn't really matter what kind of political system is around to me as long as the people (with and without power) are aiming to do the right things and support each other. If you have a democracy where crazy people vote for crazy parties, you're just as far as dictatorship. In all honesty, I think democracies are all about choosing a dictator for an X amount of years. If this dictator is a bad guy, then democracy follows suit. The same goes for all political systems from Dictatorships and down to Anarchies as far as I see it.

[Rodaklen]

This might sound like a harsh thing to say, but from a philosophical and theoretical point of view, I don't think democracy is the solution to most problems. First of all, democracy has to be defined. If a people can vote, but are exposed to propaganda, is that a democratic system? I would say no. However, the problem is that it is not possible to not be exposed to probaganda, so no place has a real democray.

Furthermore, if there was a place with real democracy, what if the people chose something that they thought would be a good policy but actually it is not? Then, something undemocratic but responsible government would be better.

IN THE USA, THEY ONLY HAVE A DEMO... THE REST IS JUST CRAZY!

Capa...

I agree that democracy is not the solution to most problems, but I belive that the propaganda is not the big issue with it, because, aside from negative propaganda like racism, the propaganda can also be used for the common good by the means of the democracy or other system. For example, a propaganda about recycling or tolerance may catch people's attention and may be the solution to certain issues in the world.

But this fact led my to ask you, what kind of problem are we talking about? is it the suppresion of liberty? or the pursue of happines (common good)?

In my opinion, liberty must be delimitated to achive the common good.

[Mahuta ♥]

But as the United States is the super power of the world, it is our moral obligation to stabilize countries while at the same time stop the violation of human rights and a form of democratic ideals might be able to do that

Says who? I don't see how you can call your selves the super power of the world.

It's what they want you to see. Its only you that made yourselves the super power of the world. No other country thinks so.

Sure our motives might be far less nobler then that but what u need to understand that we have helped stabilized Iraq, we might have went in with an ulterior motive but we still ended up doing some good

Exactly as Mr.Shiver said, you have completely destroyed Iraq. I dont see how you stabilized it when you left thousands of handicapped children and permanently blind,deaf, armless people. I really dont understand this.

we might have went in with an ulterior motive but we still ended up doing some good

Excuse me? Did you say 'good'?

It seems to me that you havent been allowed to see what the US army did in Iraq. The media only gives you certain pictures of the so called positive effect on Iraq without really seeing the big massacre you have caused.

I think rather than telling us "you have to understant that we've helped stabilized Iraq", you need to understand that Iraq was way better before the US suddenly decided to be 'the super power of the world' which it isnt to pretend to stabilize it.

I think you should watch the documenteries that show you exactly what the US did, rather than claiming that you've stabilized it. Can you imagine how many years its going to take for Iraq to be as peaceful as it was? If that's ever possible.

Have you talked Iraqis? Im saying this because alot of my Iraqi friens have been kicked out of their country or had to leave because they couldnt feel safe anymore. Earlier, Iraq was the destination of all arabs who wanted peace. Now, its the center of worry in our region.

Almost no one is thankful for your invasion of Iraq except yourselves.

Once again, like Mr.Shiver said "You didn't stabilize Iraq. You virtually destroyed it.

Edited February 12, 2009 by *~*MaHuTa*~*