"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"Pluto wrote:Isn't it.Impenitent wrote:how democratic...
-Imp
-Imp
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"Pluto wrote:Isn't it.Impenitent wrote:how democratic...
-Imp
Amusing that I get a message that Channel 4 have blocked the content in my country given that I live in they country they're based in and publicly funded from.bus2bondi wrote:i found a few interesting things in this video my son was watching today called 'Athens, Dawn of Democracy' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xtn-BZH_ ... re=related somewhere in it, it talked about how they had each person of Athens participate in government for a month each and rotate, to prevent corruption, abuse of power, and to truly be a government of the people, etc... and showed how they did this. i never knew this before. apparently they voted on issues, but not for politicians. i thought it was very interesting.
i was thinking about that the other day actually. voting on issues, rather than for politicians.. then i saw this today and again, i thought it was pretty interesting. and a very admiral experiment. perhaps this may be an idea to influence and help our continued and inevitable quest for advancement?
When I start watching the link, I think how close is this description, programme to what it's describing and I then realise that both are fabrications of each other. The programme tells you what the programme wants you to see and think. It has been made for you.i found a few interesting things in this video my son was watching today called 'Athens, Dawn of Democracy' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xtn-BZH_ ... re=related somewhere in it, it talked about how they had each person of Athens participate in government for a month each and rotate, to prevent corruption, abuse of power, and to truly be a government of the people, etc... and showed how they did this. i never knew this before. apparently they voted on issues, but not for politicians. i thought it was very interesting.
i was thinking about that the other day actually. voting on issues, rather than for politicians.. then i saw this today and again, i thought it was pretty interesting. and a very admiral experiment. perhaps this may be an idea to influence and help our continued and inevitable quest for advancement?
yes, that is ironic. very ironic. so ironic, you'd almost want to find out why.. if you ever ask about it somewhere, it would be great if you posted it here, because i'd like to know myself.John wrote:Amusing that I get a message that Channel 4 have blocked the content in my country given that I live in they country they're based in and publicly funded from.
Anyway, the character of Athenian democracy varied with time but generally anyone who was eligible could attend the Assembly with office bearers selected by lot. One big problem is eligibility though because the Athenians were quite happy to tolerate slavery and women had no place in the political process. It would also be wrong to think that individuals didn't have power either because the generals certainly did and if you read Pericles (through Thucydides) waxing lyrical about the virtues of Athenian democracy you might well forget that he was pretty much head honcho and didn't have to rely on a lottery.
I think direct democracy is a dead duck within modern nations.
Pluto wrote: When I start watching the link, I think how close is this description, programme to what it's describing and I then realise that both are fabrications of each other. The programme tells you what the programme wants you to see and think. It has been made for you.
Why John? Given the new communication tools at our disposal I'd have thought it fairly feasible. The problem of course is the age-old one that uneducated people are not the base for a sound democracy.John wrote:...
I think direct democracy is a dead duck within modern nations.
I'm prepared to accept that the meaning of the term "democracy" has changed from the Athenian ideal of "direct democracy" so I wouldn't like to claim that "democracy" is a dead duck in the modern sense where it is generally understood to operate through representatives. I'm not claiming it's necessarily in good health either but I don't think it's fatally wounded.bus2bondi wrote:i guess you are probably right about 'democracy (being) a dead duck within modern nations', one way or another we'll all remain as toys?
I'd agree that technology makes it fairly easy to provide citizens with the information and the ability to register decisions easily but I'm not so sure we could replace the representative system so easily. Not completely anyway.Arising_uk wrote:Why John? Given the new communication tools at our disposal I'd have thought it fairly feasible. The problem of course is the age-old one that uneducated people are not the base for a sound democracy.John wrote:...
I think direct democracy is a dead duck within modern nations.
Just to be clear I was meaning large diverse populations. I've got no issue with power being devolved to the lowest level that can meaningfully exercise it while also maintaining the coherency of the sovereign body.bus2bondi wrote:thanks John, i see and appreciate what your saying. i still wouldn't put away entirely the thought of smaller localities holding more power over themselves through themselves, instead of what we currently know now.
I'm not sure what post that was (shhh..it's Friday night and I've had more than a few drinks so I can't remember ) but I believe there has to be a sense of pragmatism in our form of government and the argument that "it works" is actually quite a valid one. I'll make a confession that I'm an unabashed republican but I find it hard to argue against the (British) monarchy on the basis of the harm they've done to democracy in the UK because for all it's faults our form of democracy tends to work or at least the problems we have can be levelled somewhere else than Buckingham Place.bus2bondi wrote:i saw in another post of yours where you made a very good point about how the reality of the situation(s) pretty much begs for the form of goverment we have now. (i'm sort of paraphrasing you, i hope i haven't misunderstood you, if i have, i'll try to fix that). anyhow... that does make sense in a way, however, that is because, in my opinion, however modern we seem, we are still living in the 'dark ages' so to speak. not in all ways of course, but in many.