Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Big_Bird]

Is democracy good for everyone?

John Pilger:
Yes, if it's true democracy. In Britain, "democracy", like other noble concepts (such as "reform") has been emptied of its dictionary meaning. Instead, we have the kind of democracy that promotes grand theft as "wealth creation" and hides its poor and throws countless young people on an educational scrapheap at the age of seven. Indeed, the people who run and apologise for this pseudo-democracy, whose main achievements are inequality and corporate propaganda, despise real democracy - New Labour's well-documented loathing of genuine democratic debate and process come to mind.

DBC Pierre:
Might be. We should try it one day, just for a laugh. If the word tries to refer to what we currently have, a sort of guided Muzak with three looped tunes, then I feel not. Moreover I'm not sure it even serves serious politicians any more. I get a feeling we've outgrown our structures of thought - after all, some remain from ancient Greece - as if we're trying to run Microsoft Windows on a Commodore 64. For the time being money, news, and ignorance run democracy. Any bold new social adjustments will have to wait until all that's out of our system.

Ken Loach:
Yes, it would be good if we had actually had democracy, rather than the charade we have at the moment. The most important decisions - those that decide the future of the planet - are not made on a democratic basis. I'd like to say democratically that the NHS should be rid of all private contractors, and that all major industries should be back under public control, in fact, but that's not on offer at election time.

Naomi Wolf:
Yes, democracy is good for everyone - compared with the alternatives. If your only measure of "good" is material wellbeing, then a China with a rising standard of living but no freedom is "better" than a desperately poor new democracy in Sierra Leone. I would challenge that frame in every case. The difference is that the Sierra Leoneans have the power to shape the destiny of their own nation and create the terms of their own development.

People were well fed in Germany in the early years of the National Socialists' rise to power but the fear that descends on a closing society is as painful, judging from memoirs, as hunger or cold.


To read more opinions, click on the link to read the full article.

[mack4289]

The states with the best chance of surviving and being prosperous indefinitely are democratic. It's silly to deny that authoritarianism can be good for a country economically for a while, but ultimately it's a dead end. A sustainable, healthy economy/society relies on the kind of initiative and responsibility that democracy encourages much more than other forms of government.

[Pluto]

Yes, democracy is good for everyone. However it is important to understand the difference between a liberal democracy and an illiberal democracy. The US and the UK are two examples of fully liberated democracies. Iraq and Iran are two example of illiberal democracies. People in those countries are free to be who they want. An example would be gays in Western countries. The problems that gays face in most Western countries are the right, or privilege, to marry. In Iran, gays don't exist. This is according to the country's president.

The problem that I have with John Pilger and his lot are that anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. They have a voice in a democracy but not the only voice. It's important to understand that democracies are more about compromise and trade-offs than getting what you want.

Fareed Zakaria has written a series of articles on foreign policy as well as contemporary democracy in his book The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. This book argues that liberty precedes democracy and not the other way around. These are the problems in Iraq and Iran. They are democracies, just not free ones.

[Nowhere Man]

I doubt that you could say even a true democracy would be "good" for everyone. Someone always seems to get the crappy end of things. But a true democracy would be "fairer" for everyone.

It was my sincere hope that, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the west would take a harder look at their "democracies" and bring them closer to the real deal. But the going has been slow and will probably go on hiatus with China on the rise. In other words, as long as there is a prominent "other" form of government, people will spend more time trumpeting the virtues of ours rather than making it better.

[Kuros]

What kind of democracy?

Athenian democracy concentrates votes in the hands of its citizens. Non-citizens (slaves, women, etc) got no votes. Athenian democracy during its hey-dey was an Empire built on naval service demanded of all its citizens. Athenian democracy funded its naval expeditions by private funding. I.e. Bill Gates furnishing America's 4th Carrier Battle Group.

Republican democracy is seen in the American model. Similar to republican democracy are most other Western nations, which do elect representatives but have a weaker executive authority and a stronger law-making body. I.e. Parliamentary vs. Three Branches.

American republican democracy is about the least 'democratic' of them all. It was envisioned as a combination of three modes: democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy. Accountability is acquired through elections for the Executive and Legislative branches. But the Executive Branch need not act according to the will of the people. See Truman, Johnson, Bush Jr., almost any modern President during wartime.

[Gopher]

Recent democratic elections in Venezuela, Iran, and Palestine have produced remarkable results. So did older elections in Germany. And these results bear on such questions as the one one you ask here, Big_Bird.

My suggestion: democracy is not good for all people -- and not at all times and places, either.

[crusher_of_heads]

No.


Johnathan Cretin was reelected twice-his first election in 1993 and wiping out the PC Party of Canada was a boon-the rest was nonsense-good thing he threw that sandbag at Red River Flood before calling election.


Stockwell Day was elected leader of his party-bad. Replaced-good.


Hezbollah!

[contrarian]

The American ideal of "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is the best.

The French ideal of Liberte', Fraternite' and Egalite' puts too much emphasis on collectivism rather than individualism.

The Canadian ideal of Peace, Order and Good government is just too darned anal.

However it does seem that most democratic countries speak English. The good old Anglo/American system is hard to beat,