"Democracy is democracy" - Ugh!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - "Democracy is democracy" - Ugh!

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:03:12 AM EDT

www.coxandforkum.com

An excerpt from the accompanying commentary:
--
Objectivist scholar Leonard Peikoff has explained why democracy does not equal freedom (from The Ayn Rand Lexicon, edited by Harry Binswanger):

The American system is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic. A democracy, if you attach meaning to terms, is a system of unlimited majority rule; the classic example is ancient Athens. And the symbol of it is the fate of Socrates, who was put to death legally, because the majority didn't like what he was saying, although he had initiated no force and had violated no one's rights.
Democracy, in short, is a form of collectivism, which denies the individual rights: the majority can do whatever it wants with no restrictions. In principle, the democratic government is all-powerful. Democracy is a totalitarian manifestation; it is not a form of freedom...

The American system is a constitutionally limited republic, restricted to the protection of individual rights. In such a system, majority rule is applicable only to lesser details, such as the selection of certain personnel. But the majority has no say over the basic principles governing the government. It has no power to ask for or gain the infringement of individual rights.

A free Iraq (or Afghanistan, or Iran for that matter) would not have to exactly duplicate the American system of government, but it would have to duplicate our basic protection of the individual against the majority, i.e., against a democracy.
--

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:08:53 AM EDT

[#1]

Good post.

Democracy=mob rule.

Linking Bush to the Socrates affair and Crystal Night is insane.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:27:22 AM EDT

[#2]

What?! When did GW condole Socrates being put to death and Hitler being given massive amounts of power in Germany? This is ridiculous. And I do not think that GW will allow the Iraqis to pursue an Islamic Fundamentalist government. If he, or (John Kerry) allowed this to happen, he would be doing a disservice to Iraq, to our country and to the world.

Islamic Fundamentalism is not a democratic institution, even if it was democratically created. Once the people choose this system, a system that disregards basic human rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, religious freedom, etc - they have no way of changing it back except through vilolent revolution. In our country, we could elect a communist as President, but if we didn't like him, we could vote him out in 4 years. That's not the case in Iran....

I don't know where people get the idea that these institutions are democratic just because they were put in place by a popular vote. The process may have been democratic, but the institution is the fartherst thing from it. The cartoonist is really stretching the limits of spin here.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:33:05 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
What?! When did GW condole Socrates being put to death and Hitler being given massive amounts of power in Germany? This is ridiculous. And I do not think that GW will allow the Iraqis to pursue an Islamic Fundamentalist government. If he, or (John Kerry) allowed this to happen, he would be doing a disservice to Iraq, to our country and to the world.

Islamic Fundamentalism is not a democratic institution, even if it was democratically created. Once the people choose this system, a system that disregards basic human rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, religious freedom, etc - they have no way of changing it back except through vilolent revolution. In our country, we could elect a communist as President, but if we didn't like him, we could vote him out in 4 years. That's not the case in Iran....

I don't know where people get the idea that these institutions are democratic just because they were put in place by a popular vote. The process may have been democratic, but the institution is the fartherst thing from it. The cartoonist is really stretching the limits of spin here.

Consider this: If the majority of the people want the system to operate as it does, is that not democracy in action?
True, there are a lot of people who don't vote under that system, but the majority want it that way.
And I'll agree with you - trying to give a name to an oppressive system which the majority want is hard.

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:39:44 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
I don't know where people get the idea that these institutions are democratic just because they were put in place by a popular vote. The process may have been democratic, but the institution is the fartherst thing from it.

That is part of the point of this cartoon.

The cartoonist is really stretching the limits of spin here.

Huh? You just contradicted your previous statement.

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:41:20 AM EDT

[#5]

The cartoon makes a good point, Democracy cannot be trusted. Thank god we do not live in a Democracy!

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:43:02 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
The cartoon makes a good point, Democracy cannot be trusted. Thank god we do not live in a Democracy!

EXACTLY!!!

This is why it's so important that people understand that we live in a REPUBLIC!

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:44:30 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Linking Bush to the Socrates affair and Crystal Night is insane.

No. It's par for the course for these creeps....

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:47:40 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Linking Bush to the Socrates affair and Crystal Night is insane.

No. It's par for the course for these creeps....

I heard that Hailiburton and a young Dick Cheney set the Reichstag fire themselves!

Posted: 10/22/2004 7:08:09 AM EDT

[#9]

The cartoon makes a very good point.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Taking the position that whatever a plurality of the voters in Iraq want is what should happen, without any regard to the rights of the minority population, is ludicrous.

Posted: 10/22/2004 7:11:01 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Good post.

Democracy=mob rule.

Linking Bush to the Socrates affair and Crystal Night is insane.

I have to agree with that.

I think C&F severely overreacted to this very common misuse of the term. Bush frequently asserts the rights of individuals over whims of 'the mob.' He obviously does not believe 'Democracy is Democracy."

I always thought these guys were Bush supporters, but perhaps they're just anti-left.

Posted: 10/22/2004 7:51:43 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Good post.

Democracy=mob rule.

Linking Bush to the Socrates affair and Crystal Night is insane.

I have to agree with that.

I think C&F severely overreacted to this very common misuse of the term. Bush frequently asserts the rights of individuals over whims of 'the mob.' He obviously does not believe 'Democracy is Democracy."

I always thought these guys were Bush supporters, but perhaps they're just anti-left.

They're not anti-left, they're pro-freedom. Whenever President Bush has talked about defending freedom, they've been solidly behind him. But when he talks about, for example, establishment of a Palestinian state or his Secretary of State equivocates at the UN, they will properly bash the President.

Allowing fundamentalist Islamic governments to be established in either Afghanistan or Iraq would oppress those populations. President Bush has repeatedly stated acquiesance to "the will of the people" in those countries, nicely encapsulating that sentiment in his "democracy is democracy" remark. That's the point C&F are making.

Posted: 10/22/2004 7:56:46 AM EDT

[#12]

[DU]I always knew that bush was responsible for hitlers assent to power![/DU]

Posted: 10/22/2004 8:00:20 AM EDT

[#13]

never really thought about it that way.

Posted: 10/22/2004 9:43:41 AM EDT

[#14]

if through the course of history that those commie assholes can only site 2 instances where Democracy was a "bad thing" and go on to speculate that a islamic state could be born as a result of democracy....

Well we should be able to speculate that if Sadaam stayed in power that we would have seen another 9/11-like attack - bought and paid for by his regime.

I'll take my chances with Democracy rather than leaving that camel humper in power

Posted: 10/22/2004 9:45:43 AM EDT

[#15]

Typical.

But it ignores the most important part of Iraq's movement towards freedom.

Remember when they adopted a Constitution?
That PLUS democracy....

Posted: 10/22/2004 10:28:04 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Typical.

But it ignores the most important part of Iraq's movement towards freedom.

Remember when they adopted a Constitution?
That PLUS democracy....

Their constitution makes individual rights subordinate to Islamic law.

Posted: 10/22/2004 11:52:35 AM EDT

[#17]

Well worth a bump, check out the site!

Posted: 10/22/2004 12:35:45 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
if through the course of history that those commie assholes can only site 2 instances where Democracy was a "bad thing" and go on to speculate that a islamic state could be born as a result of democracy....

Well we should be able to speculate that if Sadaam stayed in power that we would have seen another 9/11-like attack - bought and paid for by his regime.

I'll take my chances with Democracy rather than leaving that camel humper in power

Coxandforkum are conervatives, its a pretty good site.

Posted: 10/22/2004 12:42:43 PM EDT

[#19]

Democracy's great insofar as it is subordinate to the rights and liberties of the individual. Those principles are more important than the majority ruling one way or the other.

Posted: 10/22/2004 12:54:10 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Democracy's great insofar as it is subordinate to the rights and liberties of the individual. Those principles are more important than the majority ruling one way or the other.

Thats a very western thought, and one I agree with wholeheartedly.

Posted: 10/22/2004 12:58:36 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Democracy's great insofar as it is subordinate to the rights and liberties of the individual. Those principles are more important than the majority ruling one way or the other.

Thats a very western thought, and one I agree with wholeheartedly.

That is a "republic".

"democracy" is "majority rule" with no defined basic tenents of "Individual" other than "government/Not-Government".

Posted: 10/22/2004 1:49:53 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Typical.

But it ignores the most important part of Iraq's movement towards freedom.

Remember when they adopted a Constitution?
That PLUS democracy....

Their constitution makes individual rights subordinate to Islamic law.

That is absolutely false.

Here's the Iraqi Constitution:
www.cpa-iraq.org/government/TAL.html

NOTHING in it suggests that "individual rights (are) subordinate to Islamic law".

Posted: 10/22/2004 2:13:48 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Typical.

But it ignores the most important part of Iraq's movement towards freedom.

Remember when they adopted a Constitution?
That PLUS democracy....

Their constitution makes individual rights subordinate to Islamic law.

That is absolutely false.

Here's the Iraqi Constitution:
www.cpa-iraq.org/government/TAL.html

NOTHING in it suggests that "individual rights (are) subordinate to Islamic law".

Not "suggests", but "hints" that it will be the basis for rule... I do not think a government sponsored religion is a Good Idea, but, well, they picked it.

Article 7.

A) Islam is the official religion of the State and is to be considered a source of legislation. No law that contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam, the principles of democracy, or the rights cited in Chapter Two of this Law may be enacted during the transitional period. This Law respects the Islamic identity of the majority of the Iraqi people and guarantees the full religious rights of all individuals to freedom of religious belief and practice.

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:02:41 PM EDT

[#24]

Perhaps, but other sections on the rights of the individual prohibit discrimination based on religion.

Well, I hope they have enough lawyers. They're going to need them.

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:06:20 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Perhaps, but other sections on the rights of the individual prohibit discrimination based on religion.

Well, I hope they have enough lawyers. They're going to need them.

General rule of thumb I thought was that the sooner it was mentioned in the document, the more "priority" the statement held.

This is pretty much at "the top"

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:10:46 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Typical.

But it ignores the most important part of Iraq's movement towards freedom.

Remember when they adopted a Constitution?
That PLUS democracy....

Their constitution makes individual rights subordinate to Islamic law.

That is absolutely false.

Here's the Iraqi Constitution:
www.cpa-iraq.org/government/TAL.html

NOTHING in it suggests that "individual rights (are) subordinate to Islamic law".

Hey, cool, thanks for the pointer. From Chapter 2, Article 7:

Islam is the official religion of the State and is to be considered a source of legislation. No law that contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam, the principles of democracy, or the rights cited in Chapter Two of this Law may be enacted during the transitional period.

Note that "the universally agreed tenets of Islam" is listed first.

Edit: Oops, I now see that brasspile beat me to the punch.

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:14:12 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
I do not think a government sponsored religion is a Good Idea, but, well, they picked it.

brasspile, with this statement are you agreeing with President Bush that you're "disappointed", but hey, "democracy is democracy"?

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:16:45 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not think a government sponsored religion is a Good Idea, but, well, they picked it.

brasspile, with this statement are you agreeing with President Bush that you're "disappointed", but hey, "democracy is democracy"?

Well, I guess if you put it like that, yep.

If we don't let them decide their fate, we might as well go the whole 9 yards and make it Iraq, Republic Of USA.

Posted: 10/22/2004 3:25:20 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not think a government sponsored religion is a Good Idea, but, well, they picked it.

brasspile, with this statement are you agreeing with President Bush that you're "disappointed", but hey, "democracy is democracy"?

Well, I guess if you put it like that, yep.

If we don't let them decide their fate, we might as well go the whole 9 yards and make it Iraq, Republic Of USA.

Do you think so? I'm a little weak on my post-WWII history; how did we handle Germany and Japan? Did we not impose a constitution on each of them?

In any case, rather than just shrug and say "OK, whatever you want", we should exercise our considerable influence to convince them to make protection of individual rights the primary tenent in that document.

Posted: 10/22/2004 5:54:04 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not think a government sponsored religion is a Good Idea, but, well, they picked it.

brasspile, with this statement are you agreeing with President Bush that you're "disappointed", but hey, "democracy is democracy"?

Well, I guess if you put it like that, yep.

If we don't let them decide their fate, we might as well go the whole 9 yards and make it Iraq, Republic Of USA.

Do you think so? I'm a little weak on my post-WWII history; how did we handle Germany and Japan? Did we not impose a constitution on each of them?

In any case, rather than just shrug and say "OK, whatever you want", we should exercise our considerable influence to convince them to make protection of individual rights the primary tenent in that document.

Just as Japan and all the Eastern asses we kicked/saved, we gave them a choice: Install a democratic government and we will reward you with money.

If you notice, Japan, Germany, etc. do not have a house/senate and individual rights along with a supreme court, that didn't stop us from massive funding/rebuilding and purchasing their products.

I think the same applies here.

-- Edit to add: It was about "Not Communist" 50 years ago. NOT "Not Islam".

Posted: 10/22/2004 6:01:40 PM EDT

[#31]

Democracy should not be trusted because it puts the will of a usually ignorant majority over the rights of a minority, that being the individual; seems kind of socialistic to me.

I think that when the rights of the individual are protected you inturn protect the rights of the whole.