|
|
General Discussion
Started by Erik C. Christensen at 12-23-2005 12:06 PM. Topic has 26 replies.
 
 
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
12-23-2005, 12:06 PM
|
Erik C. Christensen
Joined on 12-08-2005
Posts 13
|
|
|
This will be my last comment on this thread because I don't like to feed the trolls. B.R. said,"Notice how Christensen leaps straight for your comment about no longer calling yourself an objectivist rather than dealing with the substance of your post." Obviously Brad, you did not read my post, because first, I made the statement about being more Liberarian than Objectivist at the end of my post. And second , not only did I 'deal' with the substance of his post, I also exposed the egregious error of every claim of his. Read it, again.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
12-23-2005, 11:42 PM
|
Andy_X69
Joined on 12-15-2005
Posts 75
|
|
|
|
I never attempted to justify pure democracy (i.e. mass rule). I merely stated that to use the means of electoral democracy (which is not mass rule, it is an elected oligarchy, but it still sucks completely) to strengthen individual rights is akin to self-defense.
May I also inject some context here? I am an Australian, voting is compulsory here, and Australia is the only western nation that does not have an explicit statement/acknowlegement of citizen's rights.
Either way, I will not return to this thread. I do not want it to end up as a verbally-acidic festival of moral denunciations (like so many threads in so many Objectivist forums end up).
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
12-24-2005, 12:16 PM
|
Francois Tremblay
Joined on 12-19-2005
Posts 18
|
|
|
Yea, I guess it was easier for him to attack me (although it was pretty silly), then run away. Typical Randian...
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
12-31-2005, 6:15 AM
|
Luke
Joined on 12-31-2005
Posts 6
|
|
|
Brad Reddekopp wrote: | Democracy and liberty are so closely
linked in the popular imagination that to separate the two seems
unthinkable. Perhaps it's time to think it. Various
arguments against democracy are found at donotvote.net and non-voters.org
but the one that I find most interesting at this time is as follows:
ultimately, democracy makes the absurd proposition that something is
true or good if the majority say that it is true or good. If the
majority decide that capital punishment is good, then capital
punishment is good. If the majority want religion to be
subsidized by tax dollars, then that is the right thing to do --
according to democratic principles. (I'm assuming that to say
that deciding what is the thing we should do, which is what democracy is all about, is the same as deciding what is the right thing to do.)
When
confronted with democracy's flaws, defenders of democracy will often
say, "It's not perfect, it's merely the very best that we've
got". Well, how are we going to discover a better way when we
keep assuming that we've already got the best? How are we going
to get to something better if we each keep giving our personal sanction
to the organized coercion that is democracy by voting in elections and
referenda? I've stopped voting. How about you?
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity has made them good." - H. L. Mencken
|
|
Democracy is the majority of "voters" not the majority of citizens
living within its borders and it is freedom. Under freedom we can vote
to protect individual right's and place any restriction upon its demise
we deem necessary. The fact that it has not been done yet and you see
what we have as the end result with only excuses only admits you have
no concept of freedom and only see what others have done with it.
Luke
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
01-02-2006, 3:53 PM
|
Francois Tremblay
Joined on 12-19-2005
Posts 18
|
|
|
So your excuse to support an evil political system that jeopardizes
people's rights in the name of interest groups and popular beliefs is
that... what ? Organized coercion could magically become better if
everyone just agreed with you ? Consensus does not change reality.
Surely an Objectivist does not believe in magical thinking ? (or am I
too hopeful on this one ?)
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
03-01-2006, 7:07 PM
|
BridgetB
Joined on 03-02-2006
Posts 2
|
|
|
So Francois is against the use of force, ever! He even seems to
deny the use of retaliatory force or self-defense. He also denies
the magical. I wonder how it is then that an entity using force
to get its way should be stopped. By thinking really hard about
it? Writing a blog? Come on man.
The American Revolution was justified morally. More concretely,
either those men were going to have to stand up and defend themselves
or live under the strong arm of a brutal monarchy, not to mention an
insidious church.
In the interest of a true philosophical discussion without floating abstractions:
Francois, please clarify your stance on the use of force and justify your stance metaphysically.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
03-02-2006, 10:57 PM
|
Francois Tremblay
Joined on 12-19-2005
Posts 18
|
|
|
"So Francois is against the use of force, ever! "
Please do quote me saying that.
"The American Revolution was justified morally."
No it wasn't.
"More concretely,
either those men were going to have to stand up and defend themselves
or live under the strong arm of a brutal monarchy, not to mention an
insidious church."
Yea, that sure worked didn't it ? The US sure is freer, less brutal and less religious than the UK is now...
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !
Stupid American !
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
03-12-2006, 7:25 PM
|
devilsshadow
Joined on 03-13-2006
Posts 1
|
Re: Democracy
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting folks...I found myself recently attracted to objectivism
not so much out of persuasion, but out of the fact that my
"disconnected" search for truth led me to many of the same conclusions
espoused by objectivist philosophers...
democracy is one of those topics which i naturally came to question in
terms of moral validity; and, in researching the context of the topic,
it seems self-evident that many have divergent views as to what
democracy is...fact is this, our founding fathers did NOT intend
democracy to be a system where 51% of the population was able to
oppress the other 49%; however, that is EXACTLY what we've turned our
democracy into....we've allowed self-righteousness, arrogance, and
empty pride to justify the fact that our "democracy" is turning our
citizenry into a bunch of individual fascist authoritarians who are
perfectly comfortable destroying the lives of those who disagree with
them...
if we are to propose a governmental system that is better than
democracy, we must remind the citizens of the United States of the FACT
that THIS IS NOT THE DEMOCRACY THEIR FOUNDING FATHERS ENVISIONED...in
other words, if we propose a government that would be something like
the ideal objectivist government, it must be equated with the democracy
that was supposed to have been created with the Constitution....We must
remind people of the FACT that IF the constitution were upheld in the
purity of its ideals, it would IN FACT be an objectivist form of
government where each individuals RIGHT to life, liberty, and property
are genuinely respected and given as few limitations as possible, as
was, IN FACT, the intent of the founding fathers...
lookin' forward to the future convo
peace,
sean
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
03-13-2006, 2:05 PM
|
drc
Joined on 03-13-2006
Posts 1
|
Re: Democracy
|
|
|
|
|
It always distresses me when I see people discussing our form of government here in the US as a democracy. It is not a democracy, was never intended to be a democracy and has never been a democracy. It is a republic. The founding fathers considered democracy "the tyranny of the majority".
Along about the year I was born (1932) Franklin Delano Roosvelt started calling our system of government "democracy". He knew better, but there was method to his madness. He knew that it is very difficult to stampede people in a republic to vote for something they don't believe in. In a democracy it might be possible.
Roosvelt and his wife Eleanor were members of the Fabian Socialists. It was their intention to install a socialist "paradise" in the US. It didn't turn out to be as easy as they thought, but we have come a long way in the intervening years. Unless things change we will be joining the happy socialists of Europe soon.
drc
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
05-10-2006, 6:50 PM
|
Yossarian
Joined on 05-11-2006
Posts 2
|
|
|
Francois, I don't think you've fully explained your position. You say that you do not support the use of force under any circumstances. How, then, are we to protect ourselves and defend our rights when faced with a sheer force and brutality?
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
09-02-2008, 8:59 PM
|
David George DeLancey
Joined on 07-06-2007
Posts 48
|
Re: Democracy
|
|
|
|
|
......................./DEMOCRACY\...................
Decisions Express Many On Current Realizations And Combining Yieldings
8:59 P.M. E.S.T. 9-2-2008
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
12-09-2008, 10:28 AM
|
VonBill
Joined on 12-09-2008
Posts 2
|
|
|
Amen.
The days of Republic have passed into history, I fear.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 2 of 2 (27 items)
|
< 1 2 |
|
|
|
The Atlas... » Ayn Rand's Idea... » General Discuss... » Democracy
|
|
|
|