Are the left anti-democracy?

[Solly]

Just a few observations..

1) They don't support the establishment of a democracy in the Middle East. They'd rather we left Iraq alone.

2) Whenever a right-wing group is voted in, the talk is about how "dangerous" or "scary" their policies are, such as the spread of democracy. They don't seem able to accept the result of an election in which "their side" lost.

3) The majority are against such things as gay marriage or gay adoption, yet the left want to force these things through anyway.

[JohnT]

Well, you gotta wonder about an ideology which states that individuals aren't smart enough to make up their own minds, but that groups of them are.

[MikeH]

I am totally anti-democracy, most people are morons so why should they be allowed to choose who rules me?

The kind of system we have in the UK isn't too bad though, at least it allows politicians to do what they think is right rather than what the 'mob' actually wants. If we had referendums on everything we'd be living in a bankrupt hell hole with policy decided by people who are more interested in Beckham's new haircut than the intricacies of middle east politics.

[Solly]

4) The left see themselves as much more intelligent than "the mob" and think they ought to be in a position to dictate policy over the scrubby masses.

Thanks Mike.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
1) They don't support the establishment of a democracy in the Middle East. They'd rather we left Iraq alone.

Who is "they"? Who in this forum advocates that the westerners leave Iraq before a functionning democracy is in place?

2) Whenever a right-wing group is voted in, the talk is about how "dangerous" or "scary" their policies are, such as the spread of democracy. They don't seem able to accept the result of an election in which "their side" lost.

Again, who is "they"? who doesn't accept the results of a democratic election? As for criticizing your opponents and fear their policies when they have won: I fail to see how there is anything wrong with that. I actually don't see how any democracy could be functioning if everybody sided with the winner. And I'm sure glad the right is as whiny as the left when they're in the opposition.

3) The majority are against such things as gay marriage or gay adoption, yet the left want to force these things through anyway.

Modern democracy is about two things:
1. Majority rule
2. Individual rights.
You cannot have a dictatorship of the majority in a modern democracy. If you want that, go back to Athens.

[Drake Tungsten]

If we had referendums on everything we'd be living in a bankrupt hell hole with policy decided by people who are more interested in Beckham's new haircut than the intricacies of middle east politics.

Beckham got a new haircut? What's it look like?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
4) The left see themselves as much more intelligent than "the mob" and think they ought to be in a position to dictate policy over the scrubby masses.

Gladstone and Disraeli were such great lefties

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by JohnT
Well, you gotta wonder about an ideology which states that individuals aren't smart enough to make up their own minds, but that groups of them are.

The "the individuals are too stupid" crap elitism is the same among the lefty elites than among the righty elites. Any father-knows-best guy will expect the commoner to screw up (even if it can be in a different way).

The most fundamental difference between the left and the right re: individualism is that lefties do not expect a society to be functioning if individuals only looks at their own interest.
The core of the left's understanding of individuality / collectivity is that we expect society to screw up if there is no careful effort in regulating it, so that the clash of individual interests gets channelled instead of being destructive.

[Drogue]

Some are, some aren't. Many left-wing and right-wing people see freedom and the ability to do what you want to do as more important than democracy. As long as people aren't hurting others, they should not be contrained, type of thing.

Originally posted by Park Avenue
1) They don't support the establishment of a democracy in the Middle East. They'd rather we left Iraq alone.

Most, if not every, left-wing person I know supports democracy in the Middle East. They just don't think it gives us a right to go to war with them for it.

Originally posted by Park Avenue
2) Whenever a right-wing group is voted in, the talk is about how "dangerous" or "scary" their policies are, such as the spread of democracy. They don't seem able to accept the result of an election in which "their side" lost.

If you mean far right, as in the shock when Le Pen did so well in the French elections, then yes. People voting for a racist is quite scary, IMHO. It doesn't mean they can't take that they lost, it just means they think what the population did was extremely stupid.

Originally posted by Park Avenue
3) The majority are against such things as gay marriage or gay adoption, yet the left want to force these things through anyway.

Who gives those people the right to say that someone can't do something that has nothing to do with them?

It's not about the left not believing in democracy, it's that it is not a holy policy that must at all times be followed exactly. If most people are against gay marriage and adoption (depends which country you're citing) then you still have the question of whether someone else should be able to decide what a person does, when it has nothing to do with them.

I believe in democracy in that I think we should elect our rulers. I don't believe in democracy in that I think once elected, let them do their job, and if you don't like it, elect someone else.

Ask yourself this, if 51% of the population want one thing, but are not really affected that much by it, and 49% of the population would lose out horribly if it did happen, what should happen? For example, if the majority wanted a law that said that people of a certain ethnicity could be beaten up at will. IMHO, some things are more important than democracy, such as the effects of that decision. When democracy takes into account that strength of that persons views on the matters, and when the vast majority of people can understand the issues and make an informed judgement, then I'll believe democracy doesn't need contraints in the way it does now. However many people vote on whims or prejudices, without being able to understand the effects of each option. And many people believe very strongly in an issue, and would be affected greatly by it, but someone who it will not affect gets the same say. IMHO, it's not for someone to tell a gay couple that they can't adopt. As long as they want to, and the mother is happy with it, it isn't the business of the population as a whole.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
4) The left see themselves as much more intelligent than "the mob" and think they ought to be in a position to dictate policy over the scrubby masses.

Thanks Mike.

I don't think I am more intelligent than average, I know I am. I'm more intelligent than average on any scale you care to mention, better educated and better informed about current world affairs and history than average. I also am aware of the many, many things I know very little or nothing about and how to judge the quality of information I'm getting from other sources about those things.

I'm also an arrogant little fvck but you have to be to post here.

Not that that means I should have the right to tell anyone else what to do but I definitely don't want them telling me what to do.

Unlike a true democracy our current system allows some checks on what the 'public' want and what actually happens.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
4) The left see themselves as much more intelligent than "the mob" and think they ought to be in a position to dictate policy over the scrubby masses.

No, The left realises that most people are stupid, and so allowing people freedoms get's the least interference into their lives.

I think the government, who's job it is is to know about the current issues and decide on them, is more able to decide what is best for the country than the people as a whole. That is why I think we shouldn't have referendums on everything.

And yes, anyone who has an opinion on an issue that they can justify and isn't based on blind prejudice or what they heard someone say in the Sun, is better able to decide than "the mob", who follow a sheep mentality. "A person is intelligent, people are stupid".

[MikeH]

In an ideal world, everyone should do what I say and if they don't like it they can go and live in France.

[Spiffor]

HAY!

We don't want no stinkin' Brits here

[Drogue]

And we don't want you're immigrants When you secure you're end of the tunnel, we'll secure ours

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drogue
And we don't want you're immigrants When you secure you're end of the tunnel, we'll secure ours

Sorry, our police minister wants to makes sure that every relief home for immigrants get destroyed, so that they can go to Britain without monitoring.

[BeBro]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Who is "they"?

(...)

Again, who is "they"?

Have you never seen an episode of "X-Files"?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

If we can get a majority of participants in this thread voting that Spink repeatedly slams his tackle in a car door, will he stand by his principles?

[Spiffor]

YAY!

I'll gladly drop my principles of individual freedom if we can do this!

[Drogue]

I already pointed out that he was against the headscarf ban in France due to individual freedoms when the majority (70% it claimed) wanted them. And even Spink doesn't deserve *that*

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
If we can get a majority of participants in this thread voting that Spink repeatedly slams his tackle in a car door, will he stand by his principles?

I'll start the thread.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drogue
I already pointed out that he was against the headscarf ban in France due to individual freedoms when the majority (70% it claimed) wanted them. ANd even Spink doesn't deserve *that*

Then vote. And we'll see if 'Poly agrees with you or not

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
Just a few observations..

1) They don't support the establishment of a democracy in the Middle East. They'd rather we left Iraq alone.

2) Whenever a right-wing group is voted in, the talk is about how "dangerous" or "scary" their policies are, such as the spread of democracy. They don't seem able to accept the result of an election in which "their side" lost.

3) The majority are against such things as gay marriage or gay adoption, yet the left want to force these things through anyway.

1) Actually, many liberals believe that Iraqis are smart enough to establish their own democratic government now that the repressive regime has been overthrown -- we don't believe in the "white man's burden" policy.

2) I have never claimed that conservatives are anti-democracy, but if you, as a conservative, want to stoop so low like this by making the same accusation against liberals, go ahead make yourself look stupid.

[Spiffor]

Where did the poll go?

[Drogue]

I tried to bring it on-topic a bit, but it still went

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
If we can get a majority of participants in this thread voting that Spink repeatedly slams his tackle in a car door, will he stand by his principles?

Aye.

[Drake Tungsten]

Where did the poll go?

Yes, where's the " should Bods smash his bits and pieces in a car door" poll? I need to go to bed, but I want to vote before I do...

[MikeH]

I think the Moderators have limited sense of humour.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Compare the number of persons who have lived much of their lives under socialist/left totatlitatian states than under right ones. Once you think of the Soviet Union and Communist China, it is not much point in counting further.

[Drake Tungsten]

Well, that was a completely bizarre DP...

[Drake Tungsten]

Wow, that was a bizarre DP...