Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (118363)	11/4/2003 2:42:53 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

<shouldn't we prefer democracies ?> Yes. When the U.S. was founded, we could consider ourselves a democracy, even if we limited the franchise to 20%-30% of the adult population. Today the standards are higher: the franchise has to extend to the entire adult population, with only small groups excluded (felons, mentally incompetant, etc.). Further, in order to be considered a liberal democracy, no group can be systematically excluded from power, on the basis of sex, religion, race, language. The Israeli government controls an area where 10 million people live, and only about half of them are Jews (a slight majority today, soon to be slightly less than a majority). Jews hold 100% of the political power, and always have in the Jewish State. Half the population is excluded from any influence over the government and army that rule them. So, perhaps Israel meets the 18th Century standard for being a democracy, but not the 21st Century standard. And they don't come close to being a liberal democracy. Israeli liberalism and democracy only apply to Jews. South Africa under apartheid also tried to say they were a civilized Western industrialized pro-American democracy. Well, sort of. For whites.