vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: JPSandhu said: SamuelRSmith said: Moongoddess256 said: The United States isn't a democracy. Anyone who has taken a political science class knows that. It isn't even supposed to be. lol, this is where I was trying to mould my argument to, thanks for cutting it short ;) maybe not supposed to be, but it is If you know anything about democracy you would know that the US doesn´t fullfill all the requirements for being a democracy. *sigh* True democracies don't exist. For the purposes of comparison with other countries in the world, yes, we have a democracy. Just because people take political science doesn't mean that they need to bring in the pure concepts. I am not talking about true democracy just the basic requirements of democracy and the US doesn´t even fullfill all of the basic requirements for a democracy. And those requirements are? One of them are that all US citizens should have the right to vote wich they don´t and another is all votes should count which isn´t really always heppening either (Miami when bush got elected and now two states in the run between Obama and Clinton. The later can be discussed but the first one should be obvious that all should have a vote but they don´t. I do agree that the electoral college should go. Which US citizens cannot vote? Are you refering to prisoners? Which classification of government do you propose that we belong to? Edit: Also, please provide an example of a democracy by your definition. Yes I meant prisoners. I don´t know what classification your goverment would have some kind of hybrid between democracy and republic but mostly leaning to republic. There are more then a few European countries that have good examples on a good democracy.

Sorry, but I disagree that forbiding prisoners from voting qualifies as an anti-democratic quality.  Also, many Europeon countries ban entire political parties.  I would say that is anti-democratic but I would still consider them democracies.  The electoral college aside, we still directly vote for all of our representatives in the house and senate here.  The president is only one part of our government.  I don't think it's a good idea to use European countries as the watermark of what makes a good democracy either.

Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: JPSandhu said: SamuelRSmith said: Moongoddess256 said: The United States isn't a democracy. Anyone who has taken a political science class knows that. It isn't even supposed to be. lol, this is where I was trying to mould my argument to, thanks for cutting it short ;) maybe not supposed to be, but it is If you know anything about democracy you would know that the US doesn´t fullfill all the requirements for being a democracy. *sigh* True democracies don't exist. For the purposes of comparison with other countries in the world, yes, we have a democracy. Just because people take political science doesn't mean that they need to bring in the pure concepts. I am not talking about true democracy just the basic requirements of democracy and the US doesn´t even fullfill all of the basic requirements for a democracy. And those requirements are? One of them are that all US citizens should have the right to vote wich they don´t and another is all votes should count which isn´t really always heppening either (Miami when bush got elected and now two states in the run between Obama and Clinton. The later can be discussed but the first one should be obvious that all should have a vote but they don´t. I do agree that the electoral college should go. Which US citizens cannot vote? Are you refering to prisoners? Which classification of government do you propose that we belong to? Edit: Also, please provide an example of a democracy by your definition. Yes I meant prisoners. I don´t know what classification your goverment would have some kind of hybrid between democracy and republic but mostly leaning to republic. There are more then a few European countries that have good examples on a good democracy. Sorry, but I disagree that forbiding prisoners from voting qualifies as an anti-democratic quality.  Also, many Europeon countries ban entire political parties.  I would say that is anti-democratic but I would still consider them democracies.  The electoral college aside, we still directly vote for all of our representatives in the house and senate here.  The president is only one part of our government.  I don't think it's a good idea to use European countries as the watermark of what makes a good democracy either.

true perfection has to be imperfect, i know that might sound foolish but its true.

LetsAllMakeBelieve said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: Profcrab said: vaio said: JPSandhu said: SamuelRSmith said: Moongoddess256 said: The United States isn't a democracy. Anyone who has taken a political science class knows that. It isn't even supposed to be. lol, this is where I was trying to mould my argument to, thanks for cutting it short ;) maybe not supposed to be, but it is If you know anything about democracy you would know that the US doesn´t fullfill all the requirements for being a democracy. *sigh* True democracies don't exist. For the purposes of comparison with other countries in the world, yes, we have a democracy. Just because people take political science doesn't mean that they need to bring in the pure concepts. I am not talking about true democracy just the basic requirements of democracy and the US doesn´t even fullfill all of the basic requirements for a democracy. And those requirements are? One of them are that all US citizens should have the right to vote wich they don´t and another is all votes should count which isn´t really always heppening either (Miami when bush got elected and now two states in the run between Obama and Clinton. The later can be discussed but the first one should be obvious that all should have a vote but they don´t. I do agree that the electoral college should go. Which US citizens cannot vote? Are you refering to prisoners? Which classification of government do you propose that we belong to? Edit: Also, please provide an example of a democracy by your definition. Yes I meant prisoners. I don´t know what classification your goverment would have some kind of hybrid between democracy and republic but mostly leaning to republic. There are more then a few European countries that have good examples on a good democracy. Sorry, but I disagree that forbiding prisoners from voting qualifies as an anti-democratic quality. Also, many Europeon countries ban entire political parties. I would say that is anti-democratic but I would still consider them democracies. The electoral college aside, we still directly vote for all of our representatives in the house and senate here. The president is only one part of our government. I don't think it's a good idea to use European countries as the watermark of what makes a good democracy either. true perfection has to be imperfect, i know that might sound foolish but its true.

 Ok, lets not stray too far into abstract concepts.  Also, I don't expect that we will all agree on what makes a democracy.  Many countries put limits on democracy in one way or another.

BringBackChrono said: kasz216 you might be the face of western apathy to call indians middle-easterns anyways,it really amazes me to see how the americans just assume that the moral high ground is theirs, in any argument.i mean it is ridiculous, telling a country with 1.3 billion people how to do things. if the people dont like the governance, theyll deal with it(with a revolution if needed).no need for western countries to champion their cause and i feel that a country with a population as large as that needs some sort of control over the people for functioning properly.well, at the very least china doesnt try to control other countries. objectively speaking, china is on the right track. working hard now the human rights can be restored once the country achieves its financial goals

 

It's the racial group they fit into on the census chart despite being in sub asia.(As far as i know.)  Maybe it's under asian?  There is no seperate "indian" designation, and if Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo bay has told me anything it's that they're more likely mistaken for middleastern people then asians. (Well the movie and my friends.)

So yeah. I don't know what you mean by "the face of western apathy" though. Do I think it's better to live in a country that has basic human rights?

Well yeah I do. I 'd guess most Chinese people would believe that too. Some don't sure. I know someone who was from China, they think the current government sucks and everything was better under Mao. Everything was really shitty there but at least everyone got fed. Of course she still perfers being over here.

People act like overthrowing a government is an easy thing to do. People get treated like shit in a LOT of countries much worse off then China, and yet they fail to overthrow their government.

Having more people actually makes it harder to rebel in the modern era. As you can always use one section to quell another section. The entirety of a huge country is not going to rebel together.

Not to mention, after a revolution succeeds often times said revolution is just replaced by another crappy government that takes advantage of the people.

Very rarely are the right people in charge to lead to a government that benefits the people. Instead of some people.

hsrob said: @Rock_on_2008: How dare China and India try and expand their economies, it's a damned disgrace. @Profcrab: good point about boycotts and ELECTED governments. Let's say we boycott the Olympics, then what? China loses face and a bit of money on tourism which is not exactly a large part of the GDP anyway and then......... China gets bad press in WESTERN newspapers (Chinese papers will say that the west boycotted because they are afraid of China's strength and are racist). In this regard you are playing right into the governments hand and feeding the propaganda machine and promoting ignorant nationalism. The human rights record will be brought into the spotlight for a few days or weeks and then what, business continues as usual? It doesn't make any sense.

China are terrible abusers of human rights. China is run by a Communist military dictatorship

While the Western world slides into a recession. India and China, economies grow and  prosper at the expense of the Western world.  For there to be a winner there must always be a loser. Such is life.

 

Kasz216 said: Not to mention, after a revolution succeeds often times said revolution is just replaced by another crappy government that takes advantage of the people.

That sooo reminds me of Animal Farm (speaking of communism...), which I just re-read.  Great book, even if it is simple and short.

 

Rock_on_2008 said: hsrob said: @Rock_on_2008: How dare China and India try and expand their economies, it's a damned disgrace. @Profcrab: good point about boycotts and ELECTED governments. Let's say we boycott the Olympics, then what? China loses face and a bit of money on tourism which is not exactly a large part of the GDP anyway and then......... China gets bad press in WESTERN newspapers (Chinese papers will say that the west boycotted because they are afraid of China's strength and are racist). In this regard you are playing right into the governments hand and feeding the propaganda machine and promoting ignorant nationalism. The human rights record will be brought into the spotlight for a few days or weeks and then what, business continues as usual? It doesn't make any sense. China are terrible abusers of human rights. China is run by a Communist military dictatorship While the Western world slides into a recession. India and China, economies grow and prosper at the expense of the Western world. For there to be a winner there must always be a loser. Such is life.

China is very far from a communism at this point. They are now simply an authoritarian government. With big business growing in China, their government will be eventually forced to change by a new class of people, powerful business owners. Some people demand that China to change now, I'm simply happy that they are on different road that will lead to a different China in the future. I understand that everyone wants the world to be "Shinny Happy People" but it just will never be that way. Sometimes you just have to be happy when some places get less crappy than they were before.

kasz my friend
doesnt middle-east sound like a geographical position to you?
and im sorry to say, india lies in south eastern asia.
and i think human rights can afford to take a back seat to development in the developing countries,because human rights aint exactly what feeds the people.
as you mentioned your friend,there must be other people too who'd want their human rights.but that number is smaller than the people who get fed thanks to the system.when these numbers get reversed, i assure you, the government will be compelled to shape up. but until that day comes, i think its no one elses damn business what goes on there,as long as mass-murder of political opponents or innocent citizens doesnt take place.
and whats wrong with the olympics?
US shows off its strength and magnificence to the world on a yearly basis
cant little China do it too?

another thing that strikes me is how people go on about Obama being the first "black" president of a state with africans as minority
i hope the americans arent delusional enough to elect a president just to be politically correct
if not, they should refrain from insulting Obama by calling him the first black president, and start calling him the 44th president of the USA(if he is elected)

BringBackChrono said: kasz my friend doesnt middle-east sound like a geographical position to you? and im sorry to say, india lies in south eastern asia. and i think human rights can afford to take a back seat to development in the developing countries,because human rights aint exactly what feeds the people. as you mentioned your friend,there must be other people too who'd want their human rights.but that number is smaller than the people who get fed thanks to the system.when these numbers get reversed, i assure you, the government will be compelled to shape up. but until that day comes, i think its no one elses damn business what goes on there,as long as mass-murder of political opponents or innocent citizens doesnt take place. and whats wrong with the olympics? US shows off its strength and magnificence to the world on a yearly basis cant little China do it too?

So you didn't read my post at all.  It's the most "polite" way to say arab over here.  When you say Arab, people get upset, sort of like when you say black.  Instead of saying middleastern despite not everyone being from the middle east, and african american even though for all you know the guy could be british.

Yeah. Farmland does. Which China is rapidly destroying in their attempts to develop. Ariable land is being built on instead of farming there. It's one of the main reasons we have the global food crisis we currently have. Governments who can get away with have learned that by starving their people and building on their ariable lands they can make a few extra bucks through modernization or through ethanol. Countries like Brazil and the US do it as well, the only difference is that the US and Brazil make enough food to feed it's citizens. (And then some. America is by far the largest donners of food when it comes to emergency food stores. Actually John Mccain has promised to stop Ethanol subsidaries. I'm not sure if the democrats will follow suit but it would be smart.)

They don't have much meaning anymore with the US currently being the only super power. When there was the cold war, yeah it was just another dickmeasuring contest between NATO and the Soviet Block. Before then there were no super powers and it was a big "who's better" competion between them. Even when America finally loses the Super Power status it likely won't matter since atheleticism is no longer the power of the world. Some technology games would be a better use of time at this point.

I have no clue what you mean by this last part.