The only thing democracy has going for it is the fact that it's not as tyrannical as other forms of government. Nevertheess, it's still irrational by definition (as it's a manifestation of argument ad populum [which is of course a logical fallacy]). Even though in a democracy, it "could be worse", we should still strive to one day live in a rational and free society, free from all tyranny (including the "tyranny of the majority [democracy/mob rule]).
we need to work on ourselves first, then help others. We can't even get out own act together. How arrogant is it of us to try and police the world like our shit doesn't stink.
I'm against coercion. How is that warped? I believe we should aim for a rational and voluntary (free) society. How is that warped? I DO realize that democracy is a lot better than most or all currently existing systems. That does not change the fact that it is irrational by definition (argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy). The number of people who believe in something has nothing to do with whether that thing is right or wrong/true or false.
We are all still slaves by definition. I believe in self-ownership, and I do not believe in the initiation of force. I also believe that everybody should have the same rights and follow the same laws. How is that warped? I also believe that theft, murder, and rape should be universally illegal. How is that warped? Equal rights are not possible in a democracy, nor are property rights.
Yes it is true in a way. There is always force involved. The survival of the fittest, the bully, the organizer... but it doesn't have to be all negative does it?
Without a heirarchical structure would there be ANY progress? Wouldn't there be a chaotic mess of barbarians with no order, no security?
MysterEy1: I'm am not necessarily against ALL hierarchy (though I know many socialists [anarcho-syndicalists] who are). I have absolutely no problem with voluntary hierarchy (that's just free association). My personal problem is with force and coercion. I believe that everything (including and especially economic interactions) should be voluntary.
NO !!!! UtubiaPresident. No Sireeeee.
Billy......
payit4ward 4 years ago
Why donkey? are you trying to relate to the Democrat Party? any way, i am voting for obama.
javalu882005 4 years ago
The only thing democracy has going for it is the fact that it's not as tyrannical as other forms of government. Nevertheess, it's still irrational by definition (as it's a manifestation of argument ad populum [which is of course a logical fallacy]). Even though in a democracy, it "could be worse", we should still strive to one day live in a rational and free society, free from all tyranny (including the "tyranny of the majority [democracy/mob rule]).
D4Shawn 4 years ago
we need to work on ourselves first, then help others. We can't even get out own act together. How arrogant is it of us to try and police the world like our shit doesn't stink.
missdivinestalls 4 years ago
an eternal truth.
but those who are acting like they support real democracy are NOT part of the US you speak of, yet they are giving the USA a horrible name.
its a great question utubia... look forward to seeing this bloGrow...
BreaLoveARThopeace 4 years ago
democracy is an idea...as such can not be forced or coerced...
13thDimension 4 years ago
Democracy is coercive by definition. Democracy is just mob rule (which means the minority must be coerced by the majority).
D4Shawn 4 years ago
interesting perspective...
13thDimension 4 years ago
I have never heard democracy described in such a warped way.... very interesting slant on it's definition though D4Shawn : )
Billy....
payit4ward 4 years ago
I'm against coercion. How is that warped? I believe we should aim for a rational and voluntary (free) society. How is that warped? I DO realize that democracy is a lot better than most or all currently existing systems. That does not change the fact that it is irrational by definition (argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy). The number of people who believe in something has nothing to do with whether that thing is right or wrong/true or false.
D4Shawn 4 years ago
We are all still slaves by definition. I believe in self-ownership, and I do not believe in the initiation of force. I also believe that everybody should have the same rights and follow the same laws. How is that warped? I also believe that theft, murder, and rape should be universally illegal. How is that warped? Equal rights are not possible in a democracy, nor are property rights.
D4Shawn 4 years ago
People have no right to vote away the rights and property of other human beings (which is precisely what happens in a democracy).
D4Shawn 4 years ago
Yes it is true in a way. There is always force involved. The survival of the fittest, the bully, the organizer... but it doesn't have to be all negative does it?
Without a heirarchical structure would there be ANY progress? Wouldn't there be a chaotic mess of barbarians with no order, no security?
MysterEy1 4 years ago
MysterEy1: I'm am not necessarily against ALL hierarchy (though I know many socialists [anarcho-syndicalists] who are). I have absolutely no problem with voluntary hierarchy (that's just free association). My personal problem is with force and coercion. I believe that everything (including and especially economic interactions) should be voluntary.
D4Shawn 4 years ago
my title would have been Jackasses all around
JazzyLemmon 4 years ago
That's not a bad title. lol
I'd be satisfied if our major push was making sure that the world has food. Democracy can come second to that.
AVDJ 4 years ago
The world does have food if china does put lead in it!
JazzyLemmon 4 years ago
nt?
BreaLoveARThopeace 4 years ago