What's new

Democracy is a failed experiment

True, but there was serious discussion about that decision, Tony Blair lost his job, his party lost the elections and the troops are now back home. Can you say that this can be done if it was a dictator ruling UK.

---------- Post added at 12:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 AM ----------



True, but there was serious discussion about that decision, Tony Blair lost his job, his party lost the elections and the troops are now back home. Can you say that this can be done if it was a dictator ruling UK.

Blair did not lose job cos of iraq war. Labour did not lose election cos of war
I am not and have not suggested that a dictator is preferable
 
.
Gents,

Reading through the pages and it is clear, just like in past discussions about democracy, that the man is pining for the mythical 'benevolent dictator' kind of governance and where the government is only a facade for this 'benevolent dictator'.

There are differences between 'governance' and 'government'...

Governance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To distinguish the term governance from government; "governance" is what a "government" does. It might be a geo-political government (nation-state), a corporate government (business entity), a socio-political government (tribe, family etc.), or any number of different kinds of government, but governance is the physical exercise of management power and policy, while government is the instrument (usually collective) that does it. The term government is also used more abstractly as a synonym for governance, as in the Canadian motto, "Peace, Order and Good Government".
The wish for this 'benevolent' dictator' does not have to reside in one person but can also be in a political party, like how communist dictatorships considers themselves 'all wise and knowing' on what is best for the country and is intolerant of any dissent. The lack of details for this alternate form of government and methods of governance when criticizing democratic means and institutions is typical of evasion by the critic.

You want a king, come out and say it.
 
.
demoCRAZY is failed. Nothing comes close to universal brotherhood that was designed by Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that is democracy by itself
 
.
I agree that Democracy is over-rated. For instance, I don't agree with how the Western powers impose conditions on weaker countries as to what system they should use. Like as in: "If you aren't democratic, we'll impose sanctions on you, and you lot will all rot." This is really retarded.
How many dictatorships are under sanctions? Assuming you know the differences between a 'sanction' and a 'blockade', the latter an act of war.

America is a good democracy. It's just that there are too many vested interests in my opinion. Or maybe there are just too many people involved(?) Although, I wouldn't call it a 'beacon of democracy for the world'. It can be a good example. That is how America is one of the leaders in higher education and Science & Technology, and their system do nurture some of the world's best minds.
Why not if the US is a 'good example'? Dictatorships can vie for the crown 'Beacon of dictatorship for the world'.

But then, as we see in China, democracy is not a pre-requisite for economic growth, stability, and prosperity. It's all about where one's commitment lies.
Dictatorships have proven to be the most efficient at exercising a nation's capital towards any venture's success. Why? Because there are no dissenting views outside of the decision making process.
 
.
Gents,

Reading through the pages and it is clear, just like in past discussions about democracy, that the man is pining for the mythical 'benevolent dictator' kind of governance and where the government is only a facade for this 'benevolent dictator'.

There are differences between 'governance' and 'government'...

Governance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The wish for this 'benevolent' dictator' does not have to reside in one person but can also be in a political party, like how communist dictatorships considers themselves 'all wise and knowing' on what is best for the country and is intolerant of any dissent. The lack of details for this alternate form of government and methods of governance when criticizing democratic means and institutions is typical of evasion by the critic.

You want a king, come out and say it.

I realise that absolute power corrupts. But before western countries settled down to democracies they had their blood letting and benevelant dictators. eg cromwell etc
 
.
What about the chinese model 1 party they seem to be doing well and have pulled more people out of poverty than the so called democratic version of india , they have literacy levels that put pak and india to shame and the west dont recognise that Chinese sytem has a "democratic" system

Well, the Chinese model is designed specifically for "China".

It is not really a model of governance that can be exported to other countries.

Like you said though, picking the best parts of each system, to create a new "hybrid" system, is definitely worth considering.
 
.
I realise that absolute power corrupts. But before western countries settled down to democracies they had their blood letting and benevelant dictators. eg cromwell etc
I accept your assertion that absolute power corrupts. but im suggesting for pakistan a road map the benevolant dictator is not the end but a start on that road
You want a king? Come out and say it. Mao was a king. Castro was a king. So were the many Soviets General Secretaries of the Communist Party of the old Soviet Empire. Dictators usually do not give up political powers easily. Let us know when Pakistan find a man or woman wise and sufficiently endowed with divine guidance and when your experiment begins.
 
.
You want a king? Come out and say it. Mao was a king. Castro was a king. So were the many Soviets General Secretaries of the Communist Party of the old Soviet Empire. Dictators usually do not give up political powers easily. Let us know when Pakistan find a man or woman wise and sufficiently endowed with divine guidance and when your experiment begins.

We did. We had Zia Ul Huq. Best thing that ever happend to pakistan. Got rid of a lot of criminals, had the country running according to Islamic law (Sharia).

What we need is a another Islamic revolution. Not some western failed style called demoCRAZY
 
. .
"Hail to the king baby!"

Sorry i didnt understand this

---------- Post added at 09:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:58 PM ----------

You want a king? Come out and say it. Mao was a king. Castro was a king. So were the many Soviets General Secretaries of the Communist Party of the old Soviet Empire. Dictators usually do not give up political powers easily. Let us know when Pakistan find a man or woman wise and sufficiently endowed with divine guidance and when your experiment begins.

Like i said earlier pakistan india and india are ancient or have ancient civilisation they only have been in existance some 60 years in their present form. if you look at history even the mother of parliamentary democracy in the uk had its blood letting and dictator in the form of cromwell. so whats the big deal.

---------- Post added at 09:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 PM ----------

Gambit if you look at the article that i put up when i started this thread you could do wel to look at your own system. it is no holy cow and needs reform too. The only ones that america serves is zionists and rich obese white men. (obama is just a token)
 
.
How many dictatorships are under sanctions? Assuming you know the differences between a 'sanction' and a 'blockade', the latter an act of war.

Um, Burma? North Korea? If my country ever comes under military rule, it'll come under sanctions for sure. The country's currently so-called 'democracy' is a joke. I support democracy for my country, but the political parties are just bad and criminal and fail to see through logic - seriously! I know, I'd support booting out their key leaders :lol:

But then, there are those pro-US Middle Eastern dictatorships that do pretty good :azn: - human rights aside :lol:

Why not if the US is a 'good example'? Dictatorships can vie for the crown 'Beacon of dictatorship for the world'.

Just saying, the US is a good example. But it should not be mandatory for others to follow.

Dictatorships have proven to be the most efficient at exercising a nation's capital towards any venture's success. Why? Because there are no dissenting views outside of the decision making process.

True. It can get ugly if the ventures go toward failure for the people. That's how China is stable. Although, I do believe that if China was a democracy and Capitalist in the first place, it would have done a lot better than now. But who knows, it might change. Even Japan used to be ruled by an Emperor and it was the very first Asian country to adopt Western technology. And look where they are now, some of most awesome countries in the world.

---------- Post added at 03:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:08 AM ----------

It's a reference to the "Evil Dead" movies. :lol:

It's a quote from the movie: "Army of Darkness"
 
.
demoCRAZY is failed. Nothing comes close to universal brotherhood that was designed by Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that is democracy by itself

Yes I agree, we should follow what our Prophet (SAWW) has said. He (SAWW) has brought the best system for us. unfortunately we are following western media blindly or they are dictating us, anyways we are taught that separate the relegion from state. However according to my belief this is against our relegion. May be it is true for other relegions. but when we talk about Islam. It covers every aspect of our life. so how come we we put aside islam from in our state matters. We need a Islamic government. based on principles not on the might is right policy.
 
.
Um, Burma? North Korea? If my country ever comes under military rule, it'll come under sanctions for sure.
Is that all? The world has more dictatorships than functional democracies. But according to you, we automatically impose sanctions on a dictatorship. So why the discrepancies?

Just saying, the US is a good example. But it should not be mandatory for others to follow.
Who says our system is 'mandatory'? We say it is 'desirable'.

True. It can get ugly if the ventures go toward failure for the people. That's how China is stable. Although, I do believe that if China was a democracy and Capitalist in the first place, it would have done a lot better than now. But who knows, it might change. Even Japan used to be ruled by an Emperor and it was the very first Asian country to adopt Western technology. And look where they are now, some of most awesome countries in the world.
Japan is a constitutional monarchy, of which several European countries shares the same style of representing a country. There usually is a head-of-state and head-of-government (or chief executive of the government). A constitutional monarchy has a hereditary head-of-state but a revolving chief executive. France has a President who is head-of-state and a Prime Minister who is the government's chief executive. The US is different in that the President is both.
 
. .
Im sorry to say but you seem to be a bit dim if you think that I am saying the chinese model is better Im saying its a different system that has good and bad in it. Its sad when someone makes a silly point like you they get a thank you but you see thats the problem with a system based on popularity. At school if a teacher asks a question what is 2 plus 2 just cos most people say it is 5 does not make it right or good This is not meant to be an adversarial thread. I suggested that we should all look with some introspection and make suggestions

But then if your question was as simple as 2+2 and the answer so obvious as 4,then you would not be debating it.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom