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: Sun Tzu who wrote (119135)	11/11/2003 12:30:01 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<> The majority votes to keep other groups repressed or to take their property or freedom. That may have been acceptable as democracy in ancient Greece, but not anymore. A modern democracy has the concepts of unalienable rights and the respect for the rights of minority. For example we could not consider China a democracy no matter how many Chinese vote to repress Tibetans (or how many whites vote to enslave the blacks,> Provided the smaller groups comply with the group-think, you are right to some extent. But there are swarms of laws creating all sorts of victimless crimes. It was only in the 1980s that New Zealand got rid of laws making homosexuality illegal for example. The USA in my lifetime, never mind back in the ancient Grecian times, days of slavery and free fire zones on "Redskins", held melanin rich people hostage to lynchings. I won't bother arguing the case, because there are none so blind as those who will not see. But a couple of points, if you wish to see the light. The FDA for example makes it illegal to self-medicate. There are swarms of laws on what people may or may not do which affects only themselves. Then, there's taxation. The democratic majority, through their elected leaders, takes about half the money that people earn and redistributes it to themselves. It's called pork barrel politics. Right now for example, think of steel imports and the USA's vaunted promotion of free trade. Steal from USA steel users to allow USA steel producers to charge higher prices. And they attack Microsoft for charging excessive prices. Snigger... I hasten to add that snigger is not a racist expression, though it is expressing denigration, which again, is not a racist word. Then there's conscription. There's gaoling or even execution of refuseniks. If a bloke refuses to be press-ganged, they'll gaol him and if he offers sufficient resistance, refusing to go quietly, they'll kill him. It's not a debate. This is just a matter of fact. Why pretend that democracy has the mystical properties of freedom? It doesn't. It's just less malevolent than the single dictator for life process of the past. Even the best democracies are completely repressive, with arbitrary, bossy britches rules against individuals deciding things for themselves and confiscating their property, and lives in some cases. I'd be interested in seeing which country you think has freedom. A guy is being gaoled in New Zealand for cutting down sacred and mystical native trees on his own property in contravention of a court order. We worship trees here. I don't know what tree worship is called. There are bigger gaol penalties here for killing your own trees than for killing your own children [in some instances anyway]. The USA has similarly repressive laws in all sorts of ways. So now, the USA has a war going on in Iraq and a trade war going on over steel. While hypocritically going on about the benefits of free trade. Lies and hypocrisy. King George II is in favour of freedom and free trade. Unless he isn't. Snigger. Mqurice