User Tag List

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: Democracy as Aristocracy2961 days old

  1. #11
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-05-09
    Posts
    3,945
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amerinese View Post
    I agree on this point, although I would say that I trust pediatricians who are also parents, over those who aren't.

    I know you're a parent and also have a special thing for pediatricians, so I'm interested to get your feedback on this.
    lol

    Actually I've never met a pediatrician who wasn't a parent, but I don't think that it makes much of a difference as to how well one performs, tbh. There may be a little bit of subjectivity or empathy involved, but medicine is a science....

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  3. #12
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-06-29
    Posts
    6,555
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pioterus View Post
    Also I would never call a mother of child / children an "unproductive member of society" so in my opinion being full time mother (or ofc being mother and making career) is definitely a voting right point 1. and 3. gained at once.
    I would. Like when they are the mother of 5 different children from 5 different men they barely know, live in government housing, spend all day getting high and drunk or knocked up again, lock their kids out of the house to "go play" dirty and with nothing to eat, don't make sure they attend school much less succeed there, etc.

    ---------- Post added 2011-08-15 at 09:51 ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by larali View Post
    lol

    Actually I've never met a pediatrician who wasn't a parent, but I don't think that it makes much of a difference as to how well one performs, tbh. There may be a little bit of subjectivity or empathy involved, but medicine is a science....
    You're right, modern western medicine is science. However, I think there are some practical experiences that parents learn which are helpful in the tool set of a pediatrician. Furthermore, I think it can also be helpful if they come from a non-western background, because it provides them an alternative perspective on how things are traditionally done elsewhere vs the modern western doctrine.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to amerinese For This Useful Post:

    larali (2011-08-15)

  5. #13
    Established Member
    Turboslavic Caveman Pioterus's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-07-30 @ 07:14
    Join Date
    2010-12-21
    Posts
    2,511
    Location
    Lasy Pomorza
    Gender
    Age
    42
    Y-DNA
    I2a1b2a1a1 (A2423+)
    mtDNA
    U3a1a(1)
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Slavic
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Politics
    laissez faire
    Religion
    Metalhead
    Poland Lithuania Grand Duchy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amerinese View Post
    I would. Like when they are the mother of 5 different children from 5 different men they barely know, live in government housing, spend all day getting high and drunk or knocked up again, lock their kids out of the house to "go play" dirty and with nothing to eat, don't make sure they attend school much less succeed there, etc.
    But that's a pathology, not a norm... hopefully
    and the IEEE Milestone for breaking the Enigma Code goes to... Polish Cipher Bureau 1932-39

    “We know each other,” he agreed. “They say that you follow in my steps.”
    “I go my own way. But you, you had never, until just now, looked behind you. You turned back today for the first time.”
    Geralt remained silent. Tired, he had nothing to say. “How... How will it happen?” he asked her at last, coldly and without emotion. “I will take you by the hand,” she replied, looking him straight in the eye. “I will take you by the hand and lead you across the meadow, through a cold and wet fog.” “And after? What is there beyond the fog?” “Nothing,” she replied, smiling. “After that, there is nothing.”
    ― Andrzej Sapkowski
    Świat się zmienia, słońce zachodzi, a wódka się kończy [The world is changing, sun is setting and we're running out of Vodka.]
    ― Andrzej Sapkowski

  6. #14
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-06-29
    Posts
    6,555
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pioterus View Post
    But that's a pathology, not a norm... hopefully
    Yes, hopefully. Although my belief is that a liberal welfare state tends to develop this behavior into a sub culture, over the course of a few generations.

    My point is that "parenting" alone doesn't contribute to society, it's responsible and successful parenting that does. Obviously there is no exact science to successful parenting... so it is difficult to measure success. However, if you were to take a couple of examples with 3 children and break them down into:

    Child 1: electrician
    Child 2: school teacher
    Child 3: stay-at-home wife and mother

    vs

    Child 1: killed in a gang fight
    Child 2: in prison for robbery
    Child 3: unemployed single mother

    It's pretty easy to see who was a successful parent and who wasn't.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to amerinese For This Useful Post:

    Pioterus (2011-08-15), Unome (2011-08-16)

  8. #15
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist Acquisitorz's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-04-16
    Posts
    6,361
    Location
    Belgium
    Gender
    Politics
    Liberal
    Religion
    Lol
    Flanders lion Israel Russia

    Default

    I disbelieve "we are all born free". Everybody is born into societies, tribes, groups. From this, people are born into obligations, beginning with Parenting.

    Are not parents obligated to feed, clothe, and shelter their children? If yes, then by your same reasoning, children are by extension "entitled" to food, clothing, and shelter…
    Parenting is a choice, IF the choice is made then yes, whoever becomes a parent is obligated to provide for this child(ren).


    You essentially expect your government to provide you with almost everything (as much as possible), without demanding much from you? That is a one-way relationship of demand, without return
    Within a reason - yes, beyond reasons NO. You are reading it wrong

    Then why should you have a say in society if you have no future in it?

    none of us have future in the society, we are all facing death sooner or later, when we die we seize to exist (at least in this world lol), whether we leave offspring or not is irrelevant at this point. Choosing to have children is a personal choice, you are not obligated to reproduce, many of us cant even reproduce, some cant find a mate, some do have a mate but dont want children or cant have them.

    Leaving no children at the time of your death is not a crime, and someone who does not leave children should not be treated as inferior or superior.

  9. #16
    Established Member
    Steppe=Women-Wagons-Horses-Kurgans
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-04-17
    Posts
    1,307
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    R1b-BY593
    mtDNA
    U5b2a2
    Race
    Europoid
    Metaethnos
    Steppe Cultures/Europe
    Ethnicity
    Steppe Cultures/Europe

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unome View Post
    Inspired from: here


    Democracy, as derived from Ancient Greece, is an extension of Aristocracy. Aristocracy is the selection of a group of people who represent any given 'Society'. However different societies, peoples, and nations select representatives by different means, and by different reasoning. For example, who (which group) should govern a Nation: should this person be male/female, one race/ethnicity/phenotype over another? What should his IQ be? What should his attitude be? Who should share power, many or a few?

    From recent ABF discussions, there is a comparison between Elitism (ie. Fascism) and Egalitarianism (ie. Communism), as a rule by One opposed by a rule by Many. Perhaps this is nothing more than a matter of preference, rather than necessity?

    However Aristocracy, and Democratic-Republikan ideal representation, imposes a mix between the two. I would argue further: Aristocracy and Democracy are very much the same concept, and ultimately must impose a type of Nobility class, whereas Fascism and Communism do not, per se. These are topics revolving around Class Mobility in society & politicks.


    I claim that Aristocracy is the original ideal of Democracy: Not all should vote! Not all should govern! For example, children are 'Irresponsible'. And adults are 'Responsible'. Therefore children should not govern society and adults should govern society.

    This is contrary to Libertarian ideals, such that, people ought to become afforded "Rights", whether as Liberal Rights and Entitlements, or as "Innate Human Rights". In this way, (Negative) liberal rights can contradict the ideals of Aristocracy and Democracy by presuming one is born with various entitlements to Rule over others. These entitlements are not 'earned' per se; they are innate and immobile. One can become born-into status & prestige, earned by no means except that of Superficial traits (ie. Beauty markers, Racial/Ethnic Supremacy).

    But this does not address the question/problem of: who should vote, to begin with??

    Who agrees/disagrees with this?


    (PS. Positive Rights are known as: Duties and Obligations.)

    ---------- Post added 2011-08-15 at 06:36 ----------

    In fact I want to go much further here into politickal theory…

    Let us reexamine the very notion of Rights, Entitlements, Obligations, and Duties.

    The very concept of 'Rights' implies that any & every person in this world, on Earth, is born with something owed to you, or you owe society. Without this notion of some type of "spiritual debt", how can anyone make sense of society & government, or morality & culture???

    Should people be born with some type of spiritual 'debt' or forced to sign some innate "Social Contract" (as per Social Contract Theory)???

    ---------- Post added 2011-08-15 at 06:44 ----------



    I will do my best.

    "Personal Choice" is antithetical to all Liberal and Human Rights.

    Assume this: The males & females of a society are obligated to reproduce.

    Sex can be a Duty, too. This is just a good example… you cannot have it both ways, "Personal Choice" and Social Obligation. You are forced to choose one over the other.
    Interesting ideas.Should people who have no debts, good morale character, high intelligence,and no criminal record, be the only ones allowed to vote?
    Something of interest I noticed with regards to human behavior, most humans like to take the easy route, that gives the most gratification with the least amount of effort, so does that play a role in decisions? Another interesting phenomena, I noticed the other day, all the electricity was out in a certain area of the city. Even the traffic lights, were not functioning, and yet people of all backgrounds were yielding and respectfully allowing one another to use the intersection in an orderly manner, there was no police presence, bureaucrat, lawyer, people were managing remarkably just fine. Does this show people can make a secular society better outside the election process?

  10. #17
    Established Member
    Gone With The Breeze TheExorcist's Avatar
    Last Online
    2012-09-03 @ 01:03
    Join Date
    2011-06-05
    Posts
    168
    Location
    Cape of good hope
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    -
    mtDNA
    -
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Adriatid
    Metaethnos
    i don't know
    Ethnicity
    Arbëror
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Traditional
    Albania Portugal Order of Christ Greece Crete Italy Rome Italy SPQR

    Default

    greek democracy was a real one because it was for natives

    PS : i forggot to add that my opinion for this democracy is in my signature
    Last edited by TheExorcist; 2011-08-16 at 00:29.
    Democracy sounds good in theory but in practise it is a fallacy

  11. #18
    Established Member
    Hokey Pokey Kwestos's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-04-28 @ 17:32
    Join Date
    2011-01-04
    Posts
    8,751
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    K1a1
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Pontid
    Metaethnos
    Euro
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Politics
    Silvio Berlusconi
    Religion
    Voodoo
    Poland United Kingdom

    Default

    Well, rational thinking would suggest that not everyone should vote. The problem is that theres no way to achieve a compromise who should be included, so the compromise is that ...everyone can vote.

    In theory, in democracy we dont vote on specific issues anyway, we vote on our representatives, and these are the people who 'really' vote. Average voter does not vote for 10 or 11.5 % ox tax, they vote for Obama or Pallin. The problem with democracy is in my opinion then one level higher than on voters level, its on representatives level.

    Its obviously a two way mechanism. In ideal situation, representatives would present their general programme and attitude and then the public would choice who is in charge. There should be status qou however among all parties, that there are some basics which noone touches. There no such a status quo now.

    The real problems of parliaments are now that
    1/ representants are corrupted and they dont represent voters or interest of country neither voters
    2/ representants are often not prepared to make decisions.

    In my opinion, parliament should be based on lawyers mainly- like 50%, as they make law. Then, some economists, some humanists, some representants of every profession one each etc.
    Government should employ only professionals too.

    Parliament should be not a Big brother hoouse when MPs speak to the public and ant to gain points/ become celebrities. They should be serious, wise, independent.

    But theres no ethos of a politician, I dont know if it was better 100 years ago, I think yes, I think we have worst times now, parliament is a circus.
    Am I right or am I wrong?

  12. #19
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2011-06-29
    Posts
    6,555
    Gender

    Default

    Here in the States most convicted felons can't vote. How does that work in other parts of the world?

  13. #20
    Established Member
    Hokey Pokey Kwestos's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-04-28 @ 17:32
    Join Date
    2011-01-04
    Posts
    8,751
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    K1a1
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Pontid
    Metaethnos
    Euro
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Politics
    Silvio Berlusconi
    Religion
    Voodoo
    Poland United Kingdom

    Default

    ps I know there are regulations about who can have a right to be elected, but maybe this is the area where more work and stricter rules shoould be presented. maybe all MP should have at least Dr title? or pass some national exams? something like this.
    Am I right or am I wrong?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Weakness of Democracy
    By Papa Anodyne in forum Current Affairs & Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2011-04-06, 14:14
  2. Politickal Dispute: Democracy!?!
    By Unome in forum Politics & Law
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 2011-03-19, 20:09
  3. Democracy, the best way?
    By Fedex in forum Politics & Law
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 2011-02-26, 22:12
  4. The origins of European nobility/aristocracy
    By Wojewoda in forum History
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 2010-08-05, 14:07
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2010-02-22, 13:51

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
<