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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (54456)	1/18/2007 11:00:47 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 90947

"democracy doesn't mean security, peace, development or freedom" Excellent point, Tim. Democracy can exist without those things. Even the most hopeful projections for Iraq do not anticipate a country at peace with the rule of law and free from fanaticism for many many years to come. But if the Government can prevail over the criminal elements on an ongoing basis, then it will a success story indeed.

To: TimF who wrote (54456)	2/5/2007 6:59:07 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

But none of that adds up to there being very little democracy in Iraq. You seem to have a problem with definitions. If things are bad, there is no democracy? But democracy doesn't mean security, peace, development or freedom. On another thread you had a similar problem, arguing that if there wasn't freedom (if things where fairly totalitarian) there could be democracy. Democracy just means that the people vote either directly on issues (as in Ancient Athens, or to a more limited extent with referenda), or more commonly by voting for representatives, and that the votes have meaning (sham elections conducted by dictators don't make for a democracy). Democracy does not mean everything is good, all sorts of massive problems can exist in a democracy. But that doesn't make it something other than a democracy. By your definition, Iraq had a democracy under Saddam. After all,people voted for their leader. Iraq is a violent and corrupt place.....the likelihood of people running for office free of molestation, the likelihood of people voting free of molstation is slim to none. Those are important aspects of the democratic process. Iraq now is only slightly more democratic than it was under Iraq and I suspect that will end completely when the US pulls out.