| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ChuckBerry
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 2208
Location: Lafayette, LA
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fido wrote: CCD wrote: Do you mean that democracy is a poor system of government because it is possible for people to abuse their power?
If so, what do you recommend as a system of government where such abuses are impossible?
The guy has been exposed, his corruption pointed out, and now he will pay the price. The system works IMO.
Democracy is a system where only the people are allowed to abuse their power. Republics are forms of government based upon abuse of people and power. I will settle for a straightforward democracy. Only with sufficient power can the people be virtuous. The vice of rulers derives from their excessive power, which usually raises their price above the value of their virtue.
If you suggest that a direct, non-hierarchal democracy is possible without the possibility of abuse at any stage of the process, I await your essay to describe how such a system will work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Fido
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 3936
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
CCD wrote: Fido wrote: CCD wrote: Do you mean that democracy is a poor system of government because it is possible for people to abuse their power?
If so, what do you recommend as a system of government where such abuses are impossible?
The guy has been exposed, his corruption pointed out, and now he will pay the price. The system works IMO.
Democracy is a system where only the people are allowed to abuse their power. Republics are forms of government based upon abuse of people and power. I will settle for a straightforward democracy. Only with sufficient power can the people be virtuous. The vice of rulers derives from their excessive power, which usually raises their price above the value of their virtue.
If you suggest that a direct, non-hierarchal democracy is possible without the possibility of abuse at any stage of the process, I await your essay to describe how such a system will work.
To the extent that we have a national assembly it should be a numerous body at a low ratio to the people, such as the figure of one per every 30000 of population. Then limit what legislators can do. If individual freedom is not secure, no freedom is secure. Government might protect the minority from the majority, or the majority from the minority, but has no right to protect a person from himself. Rights are a rock bottom non compromising defense of life. No majority has the rights to limit the rights of the minority. Nor does one legislator have the right to attack the rights of others in another area to trade for a gain. Democracy is purely defensive, but in all matters only as effective as the consensus it can build. Put in its perspective, one has all rights in his own affairs, and to the extent those affairs are shared the rights in those affairs are shared up to the national level. Whatever the national house of representatives decides must pass before the people. The people should be armed and trained in arms. Everyman with a gun is the best democracy because he is in the best position to defend his basic rights. We can only give our rights and authority government to defend us, and not to destroy others with equal rights. If we do not possess a right we cannot give it to government. This does not mean we cannot have government to organize and expedite national efforts, but that they should act more in the suggestion of laws which should only be enacted with a consensus. Further, there should be no duplication of government. The representative might one moment be a mayor, and a state representative, and a national representative. Responsibility should be clear, and the problems of area should be clear at the national level.
That is my essay, in a nutshell. Hope you like it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
|
