Democracy is not the way for Pakistan!

[ddrbdgzy]

i do not know what is Bhutan model ? but i think the social insititution should be respected ,which the people chosn by the people of a country.

 

[ddrbdgzy]

dmocracy is a good thing indeed, but some one always has an special intention using it to attack others' country

 

[Spring Onion]

What about the Bhutan model ? only graduates can stand for elections ?

Regards

well dear first of all Bhutan is being run by India.

Now coming towards your question well yes thats the problem in democracy if you say everyone has the right to take part in Elections then you can not stop anyone from conetsting elections. Nor you can put any condition of education.

democracy is a starnge model where on the one hand you want welfare of the people of your country by choosing best and educated persons to the government while on the other if you stop some people from any field from contesting elections its violation of "democractic norms" in itself.

 

[muse]

“democracy is a starnge model where on the one hand you want welfare of the people of your country by choosing best and educated persons to the government while on the other if you stop some people from any field from contesting elections its violation of "democractic norms" in itself”

Exactly where is it a “democratic norm” that anyone can contest elections??? For instance, ought criminal also be allowed to contest elections?? In Pakistan, they are allowed to?? Where is it a “norm”, “democractic” or any other, that one can argue credibly that for legal assistance, one ought to consult a physician?? For instance what will be the position of the so called Lawyers movement and the deposed chief Justice, if we should argue that anyone can be a chief justice or a lawyer regardless of education or training? After all, will it not be “representative and “democratic” if we should all be lawyers and chief justices??

It is most regrettable that socialists have diluted the notion of “democratic” and infused it with their notion of egalitarianism, such that a noble idea has come to embody the silly

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Democracy has its warts. It is as perfect as the people voting as also as good or as bad as the people who consitute their representatives to Parliament since such representatives are but their reflection.

People get the govt they deserve.

Like it or not, if one prefers a totalitarian regime and calls it a democracy, it is merely abdicating one's right to opinion and action as individuals to a bunch of people who govern, and they need not be better than the ones the democracies throw up. And more suffocating is the thought that they rule in perpetuity. Change and choice is the essence of life and liberty.

At least, in a democracy one can register his view without fear and can take up issues with the Judiciary in case one feels wronged. In a totalitarian regime or a military dictatorship, one can only stew in one's own juice and keep his mouth and thoughts shut! At times, in certain countries, especially the Communist ones, it may not be safe to share one's thoughts, let alone speak out, even with one's own spouse, lest it is reported.

Therefore, of the evils, democracy is a shade better.

But, of course, if one wants to abdicate his being to a non elected body ruling in perpetuity, then it is his own choice.

One is only reminded of Patrick Henry's words - Give me Liberty or Give me Death!!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

whether you has come to china , if not, please shut up your mouth. you have the right to say ,but you have no right to foul any country.
from this forum, i can see friendly pakistan people, and i still can see your india who is full of bias. i do not know that reflects your jealous or your evil purpose to china.

however ,i can make a conclusion that india is the most democratic and strongest country in the world, but i have to added a sentence, that is only on india's mouth!

Swetheart,

This forum is not China!

Debate and prove me wrong. I would find that very educative.

Do not soft soap people to curry favours.

And do not think that CCP methods are the panacea of existence!

Your attitude is indicative of what a totalitarian regime does to views that are contrary to yours.

While the forum still continues, is indicative of a democracy, where views can be exchanged!

Got the difference?

You prove what would happen to one in a totalitarian Communist rule!

You speak of the PRC as a democratic nation. Are you aware what is democracy?

You claim that in Tibet they were serfs earlier. Well, when the CCP can dictate your lifestyle with obtuse arguments of selling liberty for progress, it makes you but serfs too! You are then no longer the Master of Your Soul or the Captain of your Fate!

Lawrence of Arabia has said that he wrote his own Fate. That is democracy.

When your fate is written by unelected people in perpetuity, then that is SERFDOM!!

Also read my earlier post.

 

[Spring Onion]

Democracy has its warts. It is as perfect as the people voting as also as good or as bad as the people who consitute their representatives to Parliament since such representatives are but their reflection.

No such representatives can not be reflection of people who voted them to the parliament beacuse they do not represent majoirty in many cases.

For example

If there are three contestants. One candidate gets 30,000 votes and wins the election while his rival candidates, the remaining two- get 20, 000 thousands each it means collectivly 40,000 votes were casted against the winner.
SO tell me how can you term him the representative of all or even of majority of the electorate???

democracy just another bluff to fool and rule the people the only difference is its a suger-quoted pill

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

No such representatives can not be reflection of people who voted them to the parliament beacuse they do not represent majoirty in many cases.

For example

If there are three contestants. One candidate gets 30,000 votes and wins the election while his rival candidates, the remaining two- get 20, 000 thousands each it means collectivly 40,000 votes were casted against the winner.
SO tell me how can you term him the representative of all or even of majority of the electorate???

democracy just another bluff to fool and rule the people the only difference is its a suger-quoted pill

Jana,

I am acquainted with you in the cyberspace and once telephonically for a long time.

I keep advising you to read and increase your knowledge since a Journalist has to have immense knowledge to spin, if that is what one wants to do, or report factually.


Types of Government

democracy, autocracy, oligarchy, monarchy, and dictatorship

In a democracy, the government is elected by the people. Everyone who is eligible to vote has a chance to have their say over who runs the country. It is distinct from governments controlled by a particular social class or group (aristocracy; oligarchy) or by a single person (despotism; dictatorship; monarchy).

A democracy is determined either directly or through elected representatives

Autocracy. Government by a single person having unlimited power; despotism (domination through threat of punishment and violence) .

Oligarchy. A government in which a few people such as a dominant clan or clique have power.

Monarchy. A monarchy has a king, queen, emperor or empress. The ruling position can be passed on to the ruler’s heirs. In some traditional monarchies, the monarch has absolute power. But a constitutional monarchy, like the UK, also has a democratic government that limits the monarch's control.

Dictatorship. A country ruled by a single leader. The leader has not been elected and may use force to keep control. In a military dictatorship, the army is in control.

Anarchy. Anarchy is a situation where there is no government. This can happen after a civil war in a country, when a government has been destroyed and rival groups are fighting to take its place. Anarchists are people who believe that government is a bad thing in that it stops people organizing their own lives.

Capitalist. In a capitalist or free-market country, people can own their own businesses and property. People can also buy services for private use, such as healthcare. But most capitalist governments also provide their own education, health and welfare services.

Communist. In a communist country, the government owns property such as businesses and farms. It provides its people's healthcare, education and welfare.

Republic. A republic is a country that has no monarch. The head of the country is usually an elected president.

Revolutionary. If a government is overthrown by force, the new ruling group is sometimes called a revolutionary government.

Totalitarian. This is a country with only one political party. People are forced to do what the government tells them and may also be prevented from leaving the country.

Types of Electoral Systems

There are countless electoral system variations, but they can be grouped into three broad families:

* Majority systems
* Proportional representation systems
* Semi-proportional representation systems.

Majority systems

The main feature of majority systems is that they usually have single-member electorates.

First past the post voting (FPP)


This system of vote counting is the simplest - the voter only votes for one candidate and whoever gets the highest number of votes is elected. It is the easiest vote counting system to calculate results. The winning candidate is the one who gains more votes than any other candidate, but not necessarily an absolute majority (50% + 1).

FPP was used in NSW until 1910 and is still used for polls, referendums and some statutory elections. FPP is used in the United Kingdom, Canada, India, the United States and many other countries.
Preferential voting (PV)

PV is usually used in single-member districts and gives electors more options than FPP when marking their ballot paper. Electors must rank all candidates by placing the number ‘1’ for their preferred candidate and consecutive numbers from ‘2’ for their 2nd choice, ‘3’ for their 3rd choice and so on until all candidates are numbered. A candidate who has an absolute majority of votes (50% + 1) is immediately elected.

If no candidate has an absolute majority, the candidate with the lowest number of 1st preferences is eliminated, and their ballot papers are examined for 2nd preferences to be assigned to remaining candidates in the order as marked. The totals are then checked and this process is repeated until one candidate has an absolute majority.

PV is used in the Australian federal House of Representatives and in some state Legislative Assemblies. PV is also used in Nauru.
Optional preferential voting (OPV)

In OPV electors place the number ‘1’ for their preferred candidate and this is enough for a valid vote. They may continue numbering candidates in order of their preference to the extent they choose. All candidates do not have to be ranked.

NSW uses OPV for the election of representatives in the Legislative Assembly (Lower House) and in local government areas/wards for mayoral elections and when one or two vacancies are to be filled.

Block vote (BV)

When the FPP system is used in multi-member electorates where electors have as many votes as there are seats to be filled it is known as the BV. Once a candidate is elected, all ballot papers are returned to the count to elect the next member. The highest-polling candidates fill the positions regardless of the percentage of the votes they actually receive.

The BV is used in Bermuda, Laos, Thailand, Kuwait, the Philippines and other countries.

Two round system (TRS)

The TRS is conducted in the same way as an FPP election and if a candidate receives an absolute majority of votes, they are elected. If no candidate receives an absolute majority a second round of voting is conducted, often a week or two later and the winner of this round is declared elected. The 2nd round may be a contest between the two biggest vote winners (the Ukraine) or those who receive over a certain percentage of the votes of the registered electorate (France).

The TRS is used in countries such as France, Mali, Togo, Egypt, Iran, Belarus and Ukraine.

Pakistan and India follows the first passed past the post!

Proportional representation (PR) systems

PR can only be used in multi-member electorates. Candidates are elected in proportion to the number of votes they receive which increases the chances of representation for small minority parties.

The proportion of seats won by each group or party should equal the proportion of votes cast for those groups or parties. For example, if a party wins 40% of the votes, it should win about 40% of the seats and if a party gets 10% of the votes it should gain 10% of the seats.

In some jurisdictions group voting squares are used. Electors may number group voting squares in order of preference 'above the line' on the ballot paper. This records a vote for the first candidate in the group with preferences going to the other candidates in the order in which they are listed and then to the next group if indicated. The alternative is marking squares 'below the line' in order of preference for individual candidates.

PR is used in Australia for the:

* NSW local government elections where three or more vacancies exist in an area/ward
* Legislative Councils (Upper Houses) of NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia
* Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly
* Lower House of Tasmania
* the Australian Senate.

PR is widely used in South America and Western Europe, and makes up about one-third of all systems in Africa.
List proportional representation (List PR)

Most PR systems use some form of List PR. List PR is used in multi-member electorates where votes are cast in order of preference for the parties which have registered a list of candidates. Parties receive seats in proportion to their overall share of the total vote and winning candidates are taken from the lists in order of their position.

Mixed member proportional (MMP)

MMP systems try to combine the elements of majority and PR systems. A proportion of the parliament is elected by majority methods, usually from single-member electorates, while the remainder come from PR Lists.

Under MMP systems, the List PR seats compensate for any disproportions produced by the district seat results. For example, if one party wins 10% of the national votes but no district seats, they would be awarded enough seats from the PR lists to bring their representation up to around 10% of the parliament.

MMP is used in countries such as Germany, New Zealand, Italy and Venezuela.
The single transferable vote (STV)

The STV system is used in multi-member districts with electors ranking candidates in order of preference on the ballot paper as in PV. Preference marking is usually optional where electors can mark as many candidates as they choose. After the total number of 1st preference votes is added up, the count begins by establishing the quota of votes needed for the election of a single candidate. The quota calculation is:

Quota = votes + 1
number of vacancies + 1

The 1st stage determines the total number of 1st preference votes per candidate. Any candidate who has more 1st preferences than the quota is immediately elected. Their surplus votes are redistributed at a fractional percentage of one vote, so that the total redistributed votes equals the candidate’s surplus. For example, if a candidate had 100 votes, and their surplus was ten, each ballot paper would be redistributed at one-tenth of a vote.

If no one has achieved the quota, the candidate with the lowest number of 1st preferences is eliminated, with their 2nd preferences redistributed to the candidates left in the race. This process continues until all seats are filled.

All Australian PR systems use the STV, although the South Australian, Victorian, Western Australian and NSW Upper Houses and the federal Senate may be thought of as semi-list systems as the ballot paper also provides for group voting above the line or in the case of Western Australia left and right of the line.

STV is used for national parliamentary elections in Ireland, Malta and Estonia.

Semi-proportional systems

Semi-PR systems are a cross between proportional representation (PR) and majority systems. There are two main types:

* the single non transferable vote
* parallel systems.

Single non-transferable vote (SNTV)

In SNTV systems, each elector has one vote but there are several seats in the district to be filled. The candidates with the highest number of votes fill these positions. For example, In a 4-member district a candidate needs just over 20% of the vote to be elected.

The main difference between SNTV and majority systems is that the SNTV makes it easier for minority parties to be represented. The larger the number of seats in the constituency, the more proportional the system becomes.

The SNTV system is used for parliamentary elections in countries such as Jordan, Taiwan and Vanuatu.

Parallel systems

Parallel systems use both PR lists and majority (“winner takes all&#8221 methods but, unlike MMP systems, the PR lists do not compensate for any disproportions within the majority districts.

Parallel systems are used in around 20 countries including Croatia, Japan and Russia.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Therefore, even a democracy is not one type!

It is for the countries to decide what they want!

But, of course, you prefer where People are forced to do what the government tells them and may also be prevented from leaving the country, then that is your choice, though I don't think that will be the choice of a large majority of Pakistanis and definitely not of India!!

If one goes by Ddzrbyk's idea that progress and economy overrules everything, as in China, then his hero in India should be Modi!!

Modi has done immensely for Gujarat progress and economy and it is the leading state in India in most features.

An interesting thought!

 

[Spring Onion]

Jana,

I am acquainted with you in the cyberspace and once telephonically for a long time.

I keep advising you to read and increase your knowledge since a Journalist has to have immense knowledge to spin, if that is what one wants to do, or report factually.


Types of Government

democracy, autocracy, oligarchy, monarchy, and dictatorship

In a democracy, the government is elected by the people. Everyone who is eligible to vote has a chance to have their say over who runs the country.

And iwish if you argue with reasons instead of just posting the defination of the system of government.

But lets see

Ok as it is stated that Everyone who is eligible to vote has a chance to have their say over who runs the country.

Now there must be thousands or millions of people in India or even in Pakistan who are not registered voters so it means a majority of the population dont have privilege to vote so how can the remaining be called the ones who have the real power to elect.

A democracy is determined either directly or through elected representatives

How can democracy be determined directly ???

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

And iwish if you argue with reasons instead of just posting the defination of the system of government.

If only your head ruled instead of your heart, I would have been saved the bother!

But lets see

Ok as it is stated that Everyone who is eligible to vote has a chance to have their say over who runs the country.

Now there must be thousands or millions of people in India or even in Pakistan who are not registered voters so it means a majority of the population dont have privilege to vote so how can the remaining be called the ones who have the real power to elect.

I am not aware of Pakistan, but in India we have the Voter's Card and we are asked regularly, through the media and door to door canvassing, to go and obtain it and get photographed.

Now, if someone does not want to vote or someone is lazy, what can you do? In a totalitarian regime, he could be jailed for not listening to the govt, but in a democracy, it is just to bad!

How can democracy be determined directly ???

By voting for a candidate!

Don't tell me that I have to also explain such rudimentary stuff to again hear your refrain that it is mere definitions!!

 

[muse]

"Democracy has its warts. It is as perfect as the people voting as also as good or as bad as the people who consitute their representatives to Parliament since such representatives are but their reflection"

Duh, just change the word democracy or monarcy or authoritarianism --one expects so much more from you than that bit nonsense.

Lets try this - is it good or bad people in the legislature or is it being true to the purpose of the legislature?? good laws or bad laws, these can be debated by the legislature that proposes them -- a democracy can have good laws or bad laws, the same is true of a monarachy or any other system.

The issue here, unless I'm mistaken is what works for Pakistan -- Mr. Quraishi's piece does not suggest that Westminster style is not good, just that it does not work for Pakistan - In Pakistan, the notion that the legislature, makes and refines law, is not, well, mature - it may or may not mature at ll if the present Westminster style continues. What people do want are institutions that work, a legislature that legislates, a judiciary that exercises laws as they have been written and not usurping the function of the legislature.

Surely, Indian friends will, grant, that what works best in one circumstance or context, may not work best in another set - Indian friends may reserve for some other venue the great work they have taken upon themselves, as far as the chinese and others who may not wish to import Western institutions wholesale and without criticism. That's not asking too much is it?

We can learn from our Indian friends, but we are unable to unlearn that which we know from experience to be is dysfunctional and indeed, dangerous. Indian friends may also learn from interacting with others that all answers do not have to conform to a Western mould or any other mould, for that matter.

 

[ddrbdgzy]

Therefore, even a democracy is not one type!

It is for the countries to decide what they want!

But, of course, you prefer where People are forced to do what the government tells them and may also be prevented from leaving the country, then that is your choice, though I don't think that will be the choice of a large majority of Pakistanis and definitely not of India!!

If one goes by Ddzrbyk's idea that progress and economy overrules everything, as in China, then his hero in India should be Modi!!

Modi has done immensely for Gujarat progress and economy and it is the leading state in India in most features.

An interesting thought!

but could you give me some proofs to support you and testify that chinese People are forced to do what the government tells them? is it you or chinese themselvies who can represtent chinese people ?

 

[gpit]

...

At least, in a democracy one can register his view without fear and can take up issues with the Judiciary in case one feels wronged. In a totalitarian regime or a military dictatorship, one can only stew in one's own juice and keep his mouth and thoughts shut! At times, in certain countries, especially the Communist ones, it may not be safe to share one's thoughts, let alone speak out, even with one's own spouse, lest it is reported.

...

Stop being clownish!

Ask Mr. Dynaneshwar Sathawane to take the issue before judiciary, when you talk with tongue between your cheeks.


Mob Stones And Beats Politician To Death Mob Stones And Beats Politician To Death In India |Sky News|World News

A politician has been stripped, stoned and beaten to death by a mob during a rally in western India.

Dynaneshwar Sathawane had been campaigning for council elections near Nagpur, in the state of Maharashtra, when about 150 people attacked.

A crowd threw stones as they stormed the stage he was on, said police official Y Yadav.

Other officials escaped but dozens pounced on Mr Sathawane, a local leader of the ruling Congress party, and battered him with batons and metal rods, the officer added.

Police arrested 19 supporters of Shiv Sena, a powerful hard-line Hindu party, over the attack.

 

[gpit]

Jana,

I am acquainted with you in the cyberspace and once telephonically for a long time.

I keep advising you to read and increase your knowledge since a Journalist has to have immense knowledge to spin, if that is what one wants to do, or report factually.


Types of Government

...

Perfect reflection of brain-washed!

Perfect example of propaganda!

If a complex world can be simplified as type 1. 2. 3... it would only be a cave-dweller's delusion!