Slimy Tactics By Which Party?

[NHPolitico]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the politicl system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Pure democracy is mob rule and is totally against the intent of our Founders.  Not everything opebo says is ridiculous.

[opebo]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the political system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Gustaf, don't bother to look up those posts, I'll gladly own up to them.  Its true I don't like pure democracy much, and think it should be limited by a republic that has democratic and undemocratic aspects balancing one another.  I'm very much afraid of the mob and think a less democratic system actually protects individual's freedoms better.  
I hope this position is not so far beyond the pale as to upset anyone.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the political system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Gustaf, don't bother to look up those posts, I'll gladly own up to them.  Its true I don't like pure democracy much, and think it should be limited by a republic that has democratic and undemocratic aspects balancing one another.  I'm very much afraid of the mob and think a less democratic system actually protects individual's freedoms better.  
I hope this position is not so far beyond the pale as to upset anyone.

Thanks. I actually trusted that you would speak up for your opinions as soon as you saw this discussion. It's not "so far beyond the pale" per se, I can see your argument, I just think you're completely wrong...

I've had this discussion with my liberal (you'd call them conservatives, but they'd kill me if I ever called them anything but liberals...) friends on democracy, and I think the real issue is the extent of political power, not the system by which the political power works. I believe that political power should be rather limited, but democratic. And that there's no need to "de-democratize" it, just limit it and it's fine.

[opebo]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the political system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Gustaf, don't bother to look up those posts, I'll gladly own up to them.  Its true I don't like pure democracy much, and think it should be limited by a republic that has democratic and undemocratic aspects balancing one another.  I'm very much afraid of the mob and think a less democratic system actually protects individual's freedoms better.  
I hope this position is not so far beyond the pale as to upset anyone.

Thanks. I actually trusted that you would speak up for your opinions as soon as you saw this discussion. It's not "so far beyond the pale" per se, I can see your argument, I just think you're completely wrong...

I've had this discussion with my liberal (you'd call them conservatives, but they'd kill me if I ever called them anything but liberals...) friends on democracy, and I think the real issue is the extent of political power, not the system by which the political power works. I believe that political power should be rather limited, but democratic. And that there's no need to "de-democratize" it, just limit it and it's fine.

Agreed - that way would work also.  Perhaps an economic bill of rights to protect economic freedoms and limit government interference.  At any rate I like to be called a Liberal in the classical sense - its really sad the people who usurped that name in the US.

[12th Doctor]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the political system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Gustaf, don't bother to look up those posts, I'll gladly own up to them.  Its true I don't like pure democracy much, and think it should be limited by a republic that has democratic and undemocratic aspects balancing one another.  I'm very much afraid of the mob and think a less democratic system actually protects individual's freedoms better.  
I hope this position is not so far beyond the pale as to upset anyone.

I agree, I'm not against "Democracy" as the term is used generically, but I am against absolute Democracy, because it is little better than mob-rule.  A federal republic is what we have and that's the best way to go.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

I'm still interested in seeing an example of a Republican on this site saying they were opposed to Democracy...

*sigh*

There's 26 000 posts on this forum. It's hard to find specific ones easily. Opebo has stated that he's thankful for the fact that Bush can win without a majority of the popular vote, and that democracy is mob rule and should be limited, and that the political system is designed to prevent too much democracy. I can't find the specific posts right now, and I don't really care that much about it.

I don't know what you think of me, but I don't generally make up reasons to attack people, it would be kind of stupid.

Gustaf, don't bother to look up those posts, I'll gladly own up to them.  Its true I don't like pure democracy much, and think it should be limited by a republic that has democratic and undemocratic aspects balancing one another.  I'm very much afraid of the mob and think a less democratic system actually protects individual's freedoms better.  
I hope this position is not so far beyond the pale as to upset anyone.

Thanks. I actually trusted that you would speak up for your opinions as soon as you saw this discussion. It's not "so far beyond the pale" per se, I can see your argument, I just think you're completely wrong...

I've had this discussion with my liberal (you'd call them conservatives, but they'd kill me if I ever called them anything but liberals...) friends on democracy, and I think the real issue is the extent of political power, not the system by which the political power works. I believe that political power should be rather limited, but democratic. And that there's no need to "de-democratize" it, just limit it and it's fine.

Agreed - that way would work also.  Perhaps an economic bill of rights to protect economic freedoms and limit government interference.  At any rate I like to be called a Liberal in the classical sense - its really sad the people who usurped that name in the US.

Good that we're in agreement on something then...

I think the benefits of democracy when it comes to retaining stability, etc. are not to be overlooked. I remember that a Swedish politician, one of the most hated right-wingers in the country, once put it like this: two democracies have never gone to war with each other. And no democracies have ever suffered from starvation. The argument for democracy doesn't get much simpler than that.

(I don't remember the exact words, and it's a translation anyway, but you get the idea). Democracy gives us peace and wealth, and I also actually think that it promotes freedom. But democracy to me implies nothing about the size of the political sphere, only how it should be ruled. I belive political decisions should be made democratically. But how you define political issues, now that's another matter.

[opebo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(I don't remember the exact words, and it's a translation anyway, but you get the idea). Democracy gives us peace and wealth, and I also actually think that it promotes freedom. But democracy to me implies nothing about the size of the political sphere, only how it should be ruled. I belive political decisions should be made democratically. But how you define political issues, now that's another matter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually its Capitalism that gives us wealth.  

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(I don't remember the exact words, and it's a translation anyway, but you get the idea). Democracy gives us peace and wealth, and I also actually think that it promotes freedom. But democracy to me implies nothing about the size of the political sphere, only how it should be ruled. I belive political decisions should be made democratically. But how you define political issues, now that's another matter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually its Capitalism that gives us wealth.  

Yep, but I think the 2 are related. Partly b/c only a democratic state can provide the stability required for a functioning business life and also b/c a democratic goverment has the legitimacy to not be afraid of uprisings and grant their citizens freedom to practice business.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(I don't remember the exact words, and it's a translation anyway, but you get the idea). Democracy gives us peace and wealth, and I also actually think that it promotes freedom. But democracy to me implies nothing about the size of the political sphere, only how it should be ruled. I belive political decisions should be made democratically. But how you define political issues, now that's another matter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually its Capitalism that gives us wealth.  

Yep, but I think the 2 are related. Partly b/c only a democratic state can provide the stability required for a functioning business life and also b/c a democratic goverment has the legitimacy to not be afraid of uprisings and grant their citizens freedom to practice business.

I think that LIBERY and capitalism are related.  Not DEMOCRACY and capitalism.  You'll notice that often times, nations that are "super-Democratic" often become single party, Marxist dominated nations.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Examples?

[Michael Z]

Indeed, RP. I for one can't think of a single example where a 'hyper-democratic' nation turned to Marxism.

More often than not, Communist dictatorships were born out of another form of dictatorship (Russia, Cuba, China, etc).

[12th Doctor]

Indeed, RP. I for one can't think of a single example where a 'hyper-democratic' nation turned to Marxism.

More often than not, Communist dictatorships were born out of another form of dictatorship (Russia, Cuba, China, etc).

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

[12th Doctor]

Indeed, RP. I for one can't think of a single example where a 'hyper-democratic' nation turned to Marxism.

More often than not, Communist dictatorships were born out of another form of dictatorship (Russia, Cuba, China, etc).

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

Anyway, i prefer a system that protects individual liberty rather than full-blown "democracy".  Remember, "Democracy" is what brought down Athens.

[12th Doctor]

Indeed, RP. I for one can't think of a single example where a 'hyper-democratic' nation turned to Marxism.

More often than not, Communist dictatorships were born out of another form of dictatorship (Russia, Cuba, China, etc).

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

Anyway, i prefer a system that protects individual liberty rather than full-blown "democracy".  Remember, "Democracy" is what brought down Athens.

"Democracy"  killed Socrates.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

WHAT?
France is NOT socialist. The current government is VERY right wing.
Parts of France are left wing (Saint Denis for example) but other parts are insanely right wing (Toulon for example).
Chirac is Waaaaaaaaaaay to the right of Bush.

[12th Doctor]

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

WHAT?
France is NOT socialist. The current government is VERY right wing.
Parts of France are left wing (Saint Denis for example) but other parts are insanely right wing (Toulon for example).
Chirac is Waaaaaaaaaaay to the right of Bush.

Chirac is authoritarian, this is true, but economically, France is a left-wing nation.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Non!
The Chirac-Rafferin government is very right wing on economics as well...

[12th Doctor]

Non!
The Chirac-Rafferin government is very right wing on economics as well...

Not according to the Political Compass.  According to that, Chirac is left of Blair.

[12th Doctor]

"Democracy"  killed Socrates.

This must be the best point I have made so far because no one has bothered to refute it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Neither of them have taken the test etc.
Their positions on the graph was probably due to the owners of the site fiddling things because they wanted Iraq to be a left-right issue... that happend a lot last year I'm afraid...

Chirac is a right winger (privatizing everything in sight+nationalism+anti-muslim bigotry), but in a way that is (fortunately) strange to Americans.
He's a Gaullist, and if he was American he would be a fringe Republican congressman with no prospect of promotion.

French politics is insanely polarised... but not very democratic (ie: ballot stuffing is VERY common)

[12th Doctor]

Neither of them have taken the test etc.
Their positions on the graph was probably due to the owners of the site fiddling things because they wanted Iraq to be a left-right issue... that happend a lot last year I'm afraid...

Chirac is a right winger (privatizing everything in sight+nationalism+anti-muslim bigotry), but in a way that is (fortunately) strange to Americans.
He's a Gaullist, and if he was American he would be a fringe Republican congressman with no prospect of promotion.

French politics is insanely polarised... but not very democratic (ie: ballot stuffing is VERY common)

I'll admit my ingnorance and give you that.  My point was more geared toward those nations in places like Africa where they give the people major political power and with-in a couple of years, the whole country is marxist.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They aren't usually Democratic... and are Marxist in name only... but I sort of see your point.

[Gustaf]

"Democracy"  killed Socrates.

This must be the best point I have made so far because no one has bothered to refute it.

That's way out there...you been listening too much to Platon...

[Gustaf]

Indeed, RP. I for one can't think of a single example where a 'hyper-democratic' nation turned to Marxism.

More often than not, Communist dictatorships were born out of another form of dictatorship (Russia, Cuba, China, etc).

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

Yeah, France and Germany have really strong democratic traditions, super-democracies indeed...[SARCASM]

And Africa is positively RIDDLED with democracies... [MORE SARCASM]

You're yet again mixing up the issue of political power with that of political system. There's nothing "super-democratic" about mob rule or state control. That's authoritarian or socialist.

[opebo]

France and Germany are two good examples.  They might not be full blown communistic, but they are very socialistic.  Several of the small countries in Africa.  Usually, ths happens very quickly, over a very short period, so quickly that we often don't notice; because giving people ultimate political power usually causes them to turn on the wealthy.

WHAT?
France is NOT socialist. The current government is VERY right wing.
Parts of France are left wing (Saint Denis for example) but other parts are insanely right wing (Toulon for example).
Chirac is Waaaaaaaaaaay to the right of Bush.

France is quite socialist in an economic sense.  A few years of 'right wing' rule by Chirac doesn't wipe away centuries of centralized statist economic institutions, high taxes, welfare state, etc.  The French economy is burdened by state owned companies, high taxes, and highly regulated private industry that is also burdened with very pro-worker state interference.  Not as socialist as the U.S.S.R. was, but it'll do.