Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Can a truly democratic society truly work?

  1. #11
    Democracy is not perfect system of government but best one, because the world intellect can't be able to put forward any alternative system yet. Democracy doesn't assume that majority make right decisions but we think that the peace & order can be maintain in society only when we accept & give respect to majority opinion. Majority may be made wrong decisions but no way out.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by rojandragon24 View Post
    Democracy is not perfect system of government but best one, because the world intellect can't be able to put forward any alternative system yet. Democracy doesn't assume that majority make right decisions but we think that the peace & order can be maintain in society only when we accept & give respect to majority opinion. Majority may be made wrong decisions but no way out.
    The problem is that historically speaking the masses have made bad decisions and have been easily bamboozled. Can a truly anything society truly work?
    I am also a writer for Serpholic Media. You can find some of my articles here: Serpholic Media Blog

  3. "Society" is just an abstract term. It doesn't really exist. Only individuals exist. It's something that is easily forgotten, especially for those of a more collectivist mindset, but it provides quite a different perspective on the whole question of society "working". What does it mean when it "works"? I think that each individual may have a different definition of that. What works for you may not work for me.

    Today's popular thinking is such that it turns a blind eye on the people for whom the current system just doesn't work, good people, productive people, those whom do not deserve such a mistreatment. When we focus so much on the majority we authorize tyranny upon the minority. We think democracy gives a voice to everyone, but democracy itself is just a set of rules, a system, that not everybody agrees with and which by definition implies living by the rules you don't agree with and never provided any agreement to, just because those with the power of numbers on their side said so (and have the guns of state to back it up should you disobey).

    I think if there is such a thing as an universal definition of a "working" society, it has to include the happiness and liberty of each and every individual. No system can guarantee that given that individuals can take impact their own happiness, but it absolutely has to ALLOW for that. No system we had so far, including democracy, ALLOWED all individuals to be happy, that is, to be who they are without fear.

    To do that you have to literally ban coercion, all initiation of violence and threats of violence from a society. This obviously then includes a government, given that violence is its mode of operation. We need to evolve beyond the mentality which sees coercion and violence as the "solution" to social problems. It's actually the most primitive idea as far as social problem solving goes.

  4. #14
    Fair enough. Now considering that we live in a world of problems and that survival of the fittest is the law of nature, will Democracy or any other form of government eventually all lead to and blend into totalitarianism as there is going to be a ruling elite strengthened through growing power of influence and the fact that a free market also holds corruption and will people recognize the danger of it when it comes to that point?
    I am also a writer for Serpholic Media. You can find some of my articles here: Serpholic Media Blog

  5. I support no forms of government. People think all ways of social organizing must involve a government, but that's just a baseless assumption. It is literally saying that all ways of social organizing must involve violence.

    Corruption is a problem that cannot be solved by legitimizing it. Since corruption involves such things as fraud and theft government essentially IS legitimized corruption. Its fiat monetary system is essentially a ponzi fraud, and its primary way of funding is theft. You cannot fight corruption in society by making it legal for some. Corruption in a free market can exist, of course, but all such action is a violation of individuals and as such essentially anti-market. It isn't so much a part of a free market as much as a cancer that jeopardizes it. "Free" in "free market" refers to freedom from not just government involvement, but any other action which is corrupt (involves initiation of force and fraud). Government is merely the biggest corrupter, but not the only one.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Democratic senator wants Internet sales taxes
    By Franc Tireur in forum Business
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13 April, 2011, 23:08 PM
  2. XWS|Xtreme Wrestling Society|E-FED Forum
    By OriginaLSyn in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18 May, 2010, 03:34 AM
  3. Synaflex Society
    By Syanflex in forum General Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3 May, 2010, 10:38 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10 February, 2009, 03:43 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •