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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (37312)	3/31/2004 10:52:30 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793970

Can't think of the precise term but nobody is served by "one man, one vote, one time" "democracy." In other words, elect a totalitarian dictator who then abolishes democracy. It's not uncommon. The institution is what matters, not the people who are elected. A properly set up institution has periodic elections, and the person who is voted out of office actually stands down voluntarily. That's how you'll know we accomplished it.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (37312)	4/1/2004 9:11:52 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793970

<<< When push comes to shove, though, do we really want to fix it? Do we want a democratic government, or one that will serve our interests? We probably can't have both.>>> We should not have rushed in in the first place but having gone in the way we did, we have to fix it. I realize how difficult it is to have 4 people agree on anything, but is there really no hope? I do not think it is impossible. Regardless what we do, there will be people against it. We have to be ruthless, but we have to be fair. The objective has to be for the Iragis to rule themselves - and the only viable structure would be a democratic one. But, we have to have a lot of patience, be resourceful, and be benevolent. Will that happen? I doubt it, but could it be done - aboslutely. Mary