• FreeEmotion
    122
    Personally, I don't think so. Politics discusses moral issues, and how to discuss and resolve those issues - a type of meta-ethics, maybe - is where conceptions of democracy live.angslan

    This is an interesting line of thought, then. So democracy takes place in the moral climate of the country it is implemented in. This explains many things, such as segregation. So apart from seeing democracy as right or wrong, it is simply a vehicle to mirror the common view.

    Is it dying? Well I don't mind as long as its purposes are fulfilled - better living standards for all, at least, we all at least will vote against starvation including our own starvation. The curtailing of human rights, especially free expression through banning facebook and spying on citizens does seem to make it look that way. Also, populations are sharply and bitterly divided in some democracies: I do not think you can have an effective democracy unless people keep the discussion civil and respectful. This is what we all want.

    The Oxford English Dictionary defines Democracy as follows:

    A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives

    Well yes, what if the population is nationalist or poor or starving, or racist, or ethno-centric? So democracy is the product of the whole population, educate the population and make them good people and this system will work much better.
  • angslan
    49


    This is an interesting line of thought, then. So democracy takes place in the moral climate of the country it is implemented in. This explains many things, such as segregation. So apart from seeing democracy as right or wrong, it is simply a vehicle to mirror the common view. — FreeEmotion

    Well, this isn't quite what I was saying. Democracy is a framework about how to have a debate. Sometimes people suggest this framework must contain certain necessary principles (for example, freedom of speech),and some of these conceptions would say that segregation is undemocratic. So, again, we would have different people raising different ideas about what is democratic. Some of these conceptions would certainly allow for segregation. But I think less and less conceptions allow for this - political equality is often a cornerstone of democratic participation, and segregation violates this.

    I tell my students not to use the dictionary. Dahl, Estlund, Habermas - there are better places to review comprehensive conceptions of democracy.
  • FreeEmotion
    122
    Democracy is a framework about how to have a debateangslan

    Of course but then that framework cannot come about as a result of democracy in the first place. There has to be a cataclysmic event, or a revolution.

    The names you mentioned - good sources to look up. Will do.
  • yatagarasu
    119


    You brought up China. I think the one big flaw that democracy has in continuing as an ideology is the threat countries like China bring. Democracy makes change very difficult to actuate. China doesn't have this issue. They just chug along, not having to deal with the competing sides, while continuing to grow and increase standards for their people. And so far it has worked very well. They took the ideas of capitalism and integrated it into their authoritative structure. Perhaps the homogeneity of the Chinese has made this possible, but I'm afraid it is quickly showing that China's system is the way to go. Perhaps it is true that the best form of government is "the benevolent dictator".
  • Banno
    3.4k
    ...best...yatagarasu

    Choose your criteria with care.
  • Maw
    1k
    They just chug along, not having to deal with the competing sidesyatagarasu

    You know what the CPC does with "competing sides", right?
  • Posty McPostface
    5.1k
    Perhaps the homogeneity of the Chinese has made this possible, but I'm afraid it is quickly showing that China's system is the way to go.yatagarasu

    This is a sad post on so many levels.
  • yatagarasu
    119
    @Posty McPostface@Maw@Banno

    Choose your criteria with care.Banno

    Certainly. It would be the positive sides of one person rule with the exception being of course that the leader looks out for his citizens! Everyone's happy! :smile:

    You know what the CPC does with "competing sides", right?Maw

    They disappear magically? haha Anyways, my point was that their system might win it comes to state building, causing more countries to have to emulate it to keep pace. Whatever they do to dissidents is part of the system, but if it leads to economic/military success it would be a template for many countries.

    This is a sad post on so many levels.Posty McPostface

    I was just trying to say that democracies are slow to change (also a good thing in many ways), and China's mix of authoritarian rule combined with capitalistic economy might allow them to progress more without the democracy (people) getting in their way. Some of the negative sides of China's authoritarianism is mitigated by leaving capitalism to its own accord. In the meantime, we can just enjoy our gridlock, as more and more money slips into our "representative democracy".

    GDP_per_capita_of_China_and_India.svg

    Look at that. Another democracy left in the dust. : /
  • yatagarasu
    119
    Also, please reference @Baden comment (below) on the first page where he implied the same thing. If they aren't necessary then we might be in a lot of trouble. The first to get to wide scale automation/robotics, CRISPR bio-genetics wins. The Chinese are historically (and currently) very very liberal when it comes to applying those technologies. Just listening to some of the scientists scoff at possible moral dilemmas makes me very queasy about the possible arms race.

    Oh, and according to the above index the world as a whole has become less not more democratic since 2006 when the index first reported. If capitalism has figured out it doesn't need democracy as much as it thought it did (after Singapore, China etc.) it may indeed simply die out. There are no guarantees.Baden

    Apologizes in advance for pulling you into this @Baden. Just thought it was relevant and you were the only one to mention something like that in this thread.
  • Ram
    105
    Democracy was a bad idea in the first place and I think it's a variation of "might makes right".
  • unenlightened
    2.7k
    A bit of history and economics with your politics? Sorry, this vid is a bit long, but what it shows is not that democracy is a bad idea, so much as that it has only ever been an idea. The 'cradle of democracy' has never really implemented it.

123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.