Want Tough Foreign Policy? Get A Democrat

Undecided said:
And in order to be representative you need democracy.

Voting for someone who will then "represent" you by doing whatever he or she wants regardless of how you feel about it isn't the same thing as a pure democracy.

Undecided said:
Democratic rule is not mob rule that is more for anarchism. Democracy entails may faucets of "rule by the people".

It's "rule by whatever mob is the biggest". A pure democracy is just anarchy with a few formalities.

Undecided said:
As long as people vote it can be classified as a democracy.

As long as the person/party that has the most people screaming for it is running our lives it can be classified as mob rule.

Undecided said:
There simply is no comparison, try again.

Stability is stability, for better or for worse.
 
Acid Cowboy said:
How on earth did George Bush create those problems?

Mr. "Dubya" created those problems by starting his presidency with an agenda of meddling in the Middle East. Just like his father.
 
This may come as a huge surprise, but people in the Middle East hated one another long before Clinton or either of the Bush's were involved in presidential politics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Voting for someone who will then "represent" you by doing whatever he or she wants regardless of how you feel about it isn't the same thing as a pure democracy.

But that doesn't happen either; the whole purpose of a representative democracy is for the representative to listen to her constituent’s then vote on x law. I don't know about you, but that is how representative democracy works.

It's "rule by whatever mob is the biggest". A pure democracy is just anarchy with a few formalities.

Wouldn't "pure democracy" be the former not the latter?

As long as the person/party that has the most people screaming for it is running our lives it can be classified as mob rule.

Ok, I hate democracy personally but what system can be offered that is better? To me Platonism, but that's a different story.

Stability is stability, for better or for worse.

Well Mao was not "stability" needless to mention the Cultural Revolution; I'll leave it at that. There is no such thing as stability, especially in a comparison btwn "Communist"-Democratic systems, because to both stability means two totally different things.
 
Back
Top