Author Topic: Madam President  (Read 29325 times)

Offline Andyr

  • Dance Commander
  • PPG
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 3178
  • Gender: Male
    • The Gibberlings Three IE mod community
Re: Madam President
« Reply #175 on: November 09, 2005, 12:01:23 PM »
Quote
But [I think] I think the best government is probably the one that interferes least with the individual.)

Short of a dictatorship where you are the dictator and said individual, there is just democracy I can think of.

There's the 'anarchism' definition you linked to in the other thread. ;) Though, yeah, perhaps instead of 'government' I should have typed 'societal system', since I guess anarchism is technically non-governed. Or was that your point?
"We are the Gibberlings Three, as merry a band as you ever did see..." - Home of IE mods

<jcompton> Suggested plugs include "Click here so Compton doesn't ban me. http://www.pocketplane.net/ub"

I am unfortunately not often about these days so the best way to get hold of me is via email.

Offline Sorrow

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
  • Gender: Male
  • Grim and Frostbitten
Re: Madam President
« Reply #176 on: November 09, 2005, 12:04:24 PM »
Siblinghood
Unity
Peace

One Vision!
One Purpose!

-----------------------------

My DeviantArt gallery

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #177 on: November 09, 2005, 01:22:22 PM »
Actually, I'm referring to your friend and mine, L. Paul Bremer III. I guess he's fallen off the Fox News radar so we'll have to forgive you for forgetting about him so quickly, but his euphemistic title was "administrator."

You oughtn't to make those kinds of assumptions. In any case, yes, Bremer was an administrator. I don't see how his powers were indicative of a dictatorship of any degree.

Quote
Given that

A. You believe that Saddam Hussein should have been replaced,
B. You do not believe that a system of government should be forced upon individuals

Wrong. I never said a system of government should not be forced on individuals.

Quote
I should think you would see the perpetuation of a more "benevolent despotism" as an ideal outcome. You highlighted the dangerous enemy aspect... so why not simply avoid the imposition of democracy and install a more palatable dictator?

There is no such thing as "benevolent despotism". Our moral obligation after removing Saddam Hussein was to give to the Iraqis a system that they could affect and participate in, not to install another dictator to do whatever he wants. Or a dictator who will answer our beck and call; the Iraqis were owed self-determination.

Quote
Unless you believe there's some greater moral good involved in imposing a new system of government, in which case we're back to me being totally confused about why you think it's good to do it to the many but bad to do it to the one.

There is a greater good in replacing a dictatorship with a democracy. This gives people a choice to participate; compulsory voting takes it away. I am not comparing comulsory voting to a dictatorship, but that is the difference.

Quote

We can most definitely call it the installation of democracy. Bremer (or a suitable replacement) could have simply kept running the country. Without all that nasty, distasteful imposition of voting.

Who was voting imposed upon? I'm not so sure that something was imposed as much as it was taken away. Iraq was not meant to be a territory of the United States or a puppet regime.

Quote

The process is, even if the individual practice is not. I fail to see why you believe imposing the process is morally superior to imposing the individual practice.

Allowing the process is more like it. Iraqis risked death to vote and none of them were forced.

Are you ready to debate the actual topic of compulsory voting rather than diverting the argument to whether or not my reasons for supporting one and not the other make sense to you? The comparison is not justified in any way.

Giving the choice versus taking it away.

Offline jcompton

  • Niche Exploiter
  • Administrator
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 7244
Re: Madam President
« Reply #178 on: November 09, 2005, 01:44:04 PM »
Your understanding of democracy and choice appears to be terminally flawed, there is no point in discussing it further with you.
Cespenar says, "Kelsey and friends be at the Pocket Plane? Ohhh yesssss!" http://www.pocketplane.net

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #179 on: November 09, 2005, 01:45:09 PM »
Your understanding of democracy and choice appears to be terminally flawed

How so?

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: Madam President
« Reply #180 on: November 09, 2005, 02:18:20 PM »
You are basically saying that forcing somebody to vote is bad opposed to forcing somebody to vote which is good.

One reason the citizens of Iraq were not too keen on voting is that they had too many rigged elections not to smell the intentions behind this election. I cannot blame them after decades of keeping our bastards/monarchs/dictators in power when it seemed a good thing for us and hindering fair elections whenever we were sure not to get the desired result for example in Algeria. I think the western powers haven't really established their reputations as impartial arbitrators with this war. Obviously nobody is going to kick you out, but holding dummy elections won't sway people who have next to no electricity, no access to fresh water or medical services and I am not talking about Katrina here.
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #181 on: November 09, 2005, 02:26:06 PM »
You are basically saying that forcing somebody to vote is bad opposed to forcing somebody to vote which is good.

That is not what I am saying at all. Again, I ask: who in Iraq was forced to vote? We are talking about the allowance of a system (democracy) to go forth versus the choice to opt out of participation in said system.

Quote
One reason the citizens of Iraq were not too keen on voting is that they had too many rigged elections not to smell the intentions behind this election.

And yet millions of them still voted.

Quote
I cannot blame them after decades of keeping our bastards/monarchs/dictators in power when it seemed a good thing for us and hindering fair elections whenever we were sure not to get the desired result for example in Algeria. I think the western powers haven't really established their reputations as impartial arbitrators with this war. Obviously nobody is going to kick you out, but holding dummy elections won't sway people who have next to no electricity, no access to fresh water or medical services and I am not talking about Katrina here.

I can't blame them for their distrust of us, either. Especially after Bush 41 hung them out to dry in 1991.

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: Madam President
« Reply #182 on: November 09, 2005, 02:56:29 PM »
@who in Iraq was forced to vote?

1. You told the Iraqies that you would stay until they are a democracy.
2. You made it clear that elections is what a democracy is about.
3. A 60% turnout means that without those barred from voting by other circumstances they send you a clear message:

Get out!

Certainly the Kurds and the Shiites don't want you to stay. Perhaps the fact you quoted about 1991 is partially to blame for that. The Sunnites would still have opposed their complete loss of power, but at least in 1991 you would have been more the knights in shining armour that the hawks aspired to be seen as now. On top of that if it turns out to be true that Halliburton at al overcharged the Iraqies for their services it remains to be seen if they feel to thankful for the liberation from an oppressive regime which sucked them dry in exchange for foreign companies which do so.
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: Madam President
« Reply #183 on: November 09, 2005, 11:27:50 PM »
Sorry Loriel, I guess I am just getting frustrated. I feel that I am repeating myself. If you go back and read my posts, you will see my definition of democracy is pretty much identical to your dictionary one. Veloxyll and cliffette also describe the practical workings of our system and how it allows everyone to voice their opinion. I believe that unless everybody votes, the government is not representative. Having a small section of the population elect a government is more like an oligarchy than a democracy. I have lots of friends who are Australian too, and none of them would vote unless they had to. And let me tell you, you would be pushing shit uphill to get people here to vote in a voluntary voting system.

*I refer all further questions to my previous posts*



If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Veloxyll

  • Seeker of Shiny Things
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
Re: Madam President
« Reply #184 on: November 09, 2005, 11:35:55 PM »
And lets not forget the extremely high numbers of people who picked some of the options on the Constitutional Ballot. Did they understand it was a free election? Or were they voting the way they'd always voted under Saddam?

The UN found the elections were free, so it wasn't deliberate coercion., but whenever you get a result over 90% (or under 10), you MUST ask the question, did the people realise they could choose both yes and no.

Or yeah, Jesters hypothesis, that they voted yes not because they agree with it, but because they want you OUT and you've said this is what has to happen for you to leave.

As for Canada and Australia being part of the commonwealth, that's a national choice. Up until we voted we were under British Colonial Rule AFAIK. then we voted, and were under our own rule. So thus, democracy did come about without bloodshed here. AFAIK there was no Edict issued from the UK saying "You must vote on becoming a Democracy!"

Personally, I'd rather have compusory voting because:
a) it encourages people to take some FUCKING INTREST in the political system. Sometimes at least
b) It gives a more representative vote.

Although Ironically last election Tasmania elected all Labor members, but the Liberals now hold full control over the Upper and Lower houses :'(
Shiny things, shiny things, shiny shiny shiny things!

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #185 on: November 10, 2005, 12:16:20 PM »
And lets not forget the extremely high numbers of people who picked some of the options on the Constitutional Ballot. Did they understand it was a free election? Or were they voting the way they'd always voted under Saddam?

The UN found the elections were free, so it wasn't deliberate coercion., but whenever you get a result over 90% (or under 10), you MUST ask the question, did the people realise they could choose both yes and no.

The turnout was not over ninety-percent, so your question about them voting as they always had is moot. As far as " yes" or "no", I believe that many did vote no in this last election. In the first election, " yes" or " no" were not the options; they were choosing MPs.

Quote
Or yeah, Jesters hypothesis, that they voted yes not because they agree with it, but because they want you OUT and you've said this is what has to happen for you to leave.

But it wasn't just about getting us out, yes or no; they have elected their representatives as well. Next month they will be voting again.

If they're showing up to get us out of there, great! They are exercising their right freely and voluntarily.

Quote
As for Canada and Australia being part of the commonwealth, that's a national choice. Up until we voted we were under British Colonial Rule AFAIK. then we voted, and were under our own rule. So thus, democracy did come about without bloodshed here. AFAIK there was no Edict issued from the UK saying "You must vote on becoming a Democracy!"

I never made an argument contradicting what you have said here. But if you think that whatever happened around the UK didn't influence or trickle down at all to its territories, well...

Quote
Personally, I'd rather have compusory voting because:
a) it encourages people to take some FUCKING INTREST in the political system. Sometimes at least
b) It gives a more representative vote.

Why don't we make every voter attend political science classes that examine current events and issues before ballot time?
« Last Edit: November 10, 2005, 03:58:39 PM by Joe »

Offline Veloxyll

  • Seeker of Shiny Things
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
Re: Madam President
« Reply #186 on: November 10, 2005, 02:12:03 PM »
The RESULT in some provinces was over 90%, so please READ what I've typed next time.
Shiny things, shiny things, shiny shiny shiny things!

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #187 on: November 10, 2005, 03:59:47 PM »
The RESULT in some provinces was over 90%, so please READ what I've typed next time.

In some provinces, yes, and that is not surprising; a lot of the campaigning was along sectarian and ethnic lines.

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: Madam President
« Reply #188 on: November 11, 2005, 05:01:10 AM »
@ a lot of the campaigning was along sectarian and ethnic lines.

Which is totally unknown to western countries. :P
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Just passing through

  • Guest
Re: Madam President
« Reply #189 on: November 11, 2005, 10:46:57 PM »
We have a female Prime Minister.  In fact, we've just voted her in again.

This is a weird thread.

Offline Veloxyll

  • Seeker of Shiny Things
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
Re: Madam President
« Reply #190 on: November 12, 2005, 01:55:36 AM »
Bloody Kiwis
Shiny things, shiny things, shiny shiny shiny things!

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: Madam President
« Reply #191 on: November 13, 2005, 05:06:50 AM »
Good spotting, Vel. I couldn't for the life of me think which country it was. Helen completely slipped my mind.

We've had the sad discussion here that the only reason women get voted in is to clean up the mess made by the last disastrous leader. As soon as things start to look a little better, another one of the boys steps in and takes over. 
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Ghreyfain

  • PPG
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4705
  • Gender: Male
    • Pocket Plane Group
Re: Madam President
« Reply #192 on: November 13, 2005, 01:29:13 PM »
We've had the sad discussion here that the only reason women get voted in is to clean up the mess made by the last disastrous leader.

Ooh, double standards.  I hope that's the reason it's a sad discussion.  Let's not forget about Margaret Thatcher and Kim Campbell.
Earn Money Sleeping.

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: Madam President
« Reply #193 on: November 14, 2005, 03:07:20 AM »
Is that my double standard or someone else's?
Maggie Thatcher wasn't voted in for her womanliness. The reason she was so popular in her party was she was the scariest and nastiest there. She outmanned them all.
I only know what you've told us about Kim Campbell - was she a Maggie too?
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Sorrow

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 197
  • Gender: Male
  • Grim and Frostbitten
Re: Madam President
« Reply #194 on: November 14, 2005, 01:13:54 PM »
And what being scary and nasty has to being manly?
I would rather call her mighty.
Yes, mighty.
Because might is what is needed to rule.

Anyway, I find all concepts based on feminity and masculity to be flawed.

Man and woman need to be smashed, because they are illusions, platonian crippled souls indeed...
New Human is to be born - mighty and sensitive, efficient and beautiful, striving for love and might.

So I say:
Man and Woman is to be smashed.
Siblinghood
Unity
Peace

One Vision!
One Purpose!

-----------------------------

My DeviantArt gallery

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: Madam President
« Reply #195 on: November 14, 2005, 04:54:39 PM »
And what being scary and nasty has to being manly?

Just as soon as we can get politicians and their spinmakers to stop believing this we might actually get a political system that works.
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Dark Raven

  • Bloody Cynical
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
  • Gender: Female
  • Flesh is the law
    • Chosen of Mystra
Re: Madam President
« Reply #196 on: November 14, 2005, 05:04:56 PM »
Reasons to have monarchs; woman can get into power and the poor little males have no choice but to accept her.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2005, 05:30:54 PM by Blood Raven »
Per me si va nella citta dolente.
Per me si va nell eterno dolore.
Per me si va tra la perduta gente...
Lasciate ogni speranza perduta che'entrate!

Chosen of Mystra home to many mods.

Offline Joe

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Gender: Male
Re: Madam President
« Reply #197 on: November 14, 2005, 05:20:11 PM »
Reasons to not have monarchs: see History of the World

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: Madam President
« Reply #198 on: November 14, 2005, 05:37:25 PM »
Just looked up Kim Campbell on the 'net. Apparently some people think the reason she didn't win because people couldn't get over the major stuff-ups of the leader before her. So she wasn't a Maggie. She was popped in to give a different image and clean up the mess. Then she gets bagged for not achieving it in five months. Apparently she did some good things in the 5 months.  :P (That is a raspberry. Just imagine the tongue is in the middle, and it'll work for you.)
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Ghreyfain

  • PPG
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4705
  • Gender: Male
    • Pocket Plane Group
Re: Madam President
« Reply #199 on: November 14, 2005, 06:25:42 PM »
Well, I was a kid, so it's entirely possible that I was brainwashed about how bad she was.
Earn Money Sleeping.