Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mack4289]

You hear a lot of complaining about complacent citizens in a democracy, but here's the paradox: the more complacent citizens are in a democracy, the better the country is doing. People only get involved on a large scale when things are really bad. If people in a democracy aren't concerned with how their country works, that probably means it works pretty well.

Not that I support ignorance, I wish people were more well informed. But the fact that they aren't isn't necessarily a cause for alarm.

[SPINOZA]

[contrarian]

Spinoza:

Let's look at your take, word by word:

"Socialism is not the antithesis of democracy." So far you have said nothing but the usual juvenile - did so, dod not - crap.

"The above drivel doesn't survive basic logical analysis." More of the same, crap.

"Democracy is a form of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system." A nice remiedial political science 90 for dummies definition.
Let's see what it says with the "not" in place.

Democracy is a form of government in which power NOT is vested in the people and exercise directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. That does not make any sense whatever, but if we give you the benefit of the doubt and move the NOT to the start of the italics we get this:

Democracy is a form of government in which power is NOT vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. That is where the NOT goes at the beginning of the italic / underline marking. That makes more sense but gives a meaning in which democracy has no personal or electoral use of people, any or all of them

There is one other place to put the NOT.

Democracy is a form of government in which power is NOT vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Try again putz, it still doesn't work. May after a retake of remidal logic 91, for dummies.

[/b][/u]

[SPINOZA]

You are rather a daft old bugger, aren't you? Not only is your typing and spelling absolutely appalling, reading ability appears to be an issue as well.

I'm going to simply copy and paste what I originally said and hope you get it this time after a brief explanation.

[contrarian]

You motto is Bullsh1t baffles brains.

Double negatives are a no-no. Bad puppy!

[SPINOZA]

1. Contrarian claimed that socialism is the antithesis of democracy.

2. Democracy is a form of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

3. The antithesis of democracy, therefore, is a form of government in which power is not vested in the people and not exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

4. No definition of socialism is �a form of government in which power is not vested in the people and not exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system�.

5. Therefore, socialism is not the antithesis of democracy.

[contrarian]

Are negatives, separated by an "and" still double negatives.

Socialism as a form of government that places collective rights above individual rights, and does not respect property rights. For this reason and hose noted above it is not truly democratic.

[Big_Bird]

But that just demonstrates it's different, not that it is the antithesis!

[SPINOZA]

[Ya-ta Boy]

contrarian is making the elementary mistake of confusing political arrangements with economic arrangements.

I would also like to point out that contrarian didn't say 'abtuthesis' = 'antithesis'. Presumably, 'abtuthesis' is a new idea which he needs to educate all of us on. For that matter, 'sociialism' may be a new animal on the politcal scene. He should inform us on this.

Until he does, the opposite of democracy is autocracy (monarchy in one of its forms).