| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
ivesjz
Banging On A Bit
75 Posts |
 Posted - 23/05/2006 : 08:41:36
|
Right then.
Seeing as there have been some recent group e-mails referring to the democratic nature of the club, I figured this might be a opportune moment to explore democracy...
Plato compared an 'organisation' to a ship, and argued against democracy on the following way.
If you were on a ship, and you encountered a storm, you would not want to ask the passengers what they think should be done to ensure your safety. You would not want the captain to make a decision only after democratic consultation. What you would in fact want is to let the expert sailors do their job. They know what they are doing, and the passengers don't. Similarly, if you wanted to invest your money you would go to an expert to help you invest it - you would not consult for inexpert public opinion and take a vote.
So, say's Plato, when we want an 'organisation' running properly, we should want it run by experts, and not by the masses. In matters of the 'state', we should want 'experts in the state' making decisions, and not the uneducated mob who don't know their arses from their elbows (not a direct quote I hasten to add!).
According to Plato, the very concept of Democracy involves expecting laymen - non experts - to make important choices where expertise is required to make a good choice. For this reason, he says, democracy is flawed.
Does anyone agree
Jon 
=============================================
"Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear? Can you remain unmoving till the right action
arises by itself?"
Lao Tzu (Dao De Ching)
|
|
|
RichL
Old Hand
15 Posts |
Posted - 14/06/2006 : 15:33:37
|
Yep,
or in more detail, the system is always screwed!
Pick one:
1. Illuminati - the masses are controlled by experts, in secret, but people feel they have no control. so rebel.
2. Overlord - decisions are made by one all knowing individual, you can't please all the people all the time so eventually everyone hates him. So they rebel.
3. Anarchy - the ignorant rule themselves, hate each other, rebel and form either 1 or 2.
See screwed!!
"the pointy end goes in the other guy" |
 |
|
|
ivesjz
Banging On A Bit
75 Posts |
Posted - 15/06/2006 : 10:33:20
|
Oh yeah...screwed any which way you turn.
Personally, I've always had a soft spot for benevolent dictatorship....
=============================================
"Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear? Can you remain unmoving till the right action
arises by itself?"
Lao Tzu (Dao De Ching)
|
|
|
|
RichL
Old Hand
15 Posts |
Posted - 20/06/2006 : 11:11:07
|
Let's keep going... How to improve the world!
1. Politicians should be UNpaid, anyone that wants to rule the world for power or financial reasons can't be a good choice for leader.
2. Lawyers should work to simplify the law and close loopholes not make it more complicated
3. Justice should not be blind. Weather right or wrong justice should fit the circumstances; regular offenders should be treated as just that.
4. No right to privacy, if you don't want to be seen doing something don't do it.
5. Ban organized religion.
Now I MUST have stepped on some toes, respond before Jon can! Or I know he will!!!!
"the pointy end goes in the other guy" |
|
|
|
Rtee
Newbie
9 Posts |
Posted - 21/08/2006 : 12:11:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by RichL
Let's keep going... How to improve the world!
4. No right to privacy, if you don't want to be seen doing something don't do it.
5. Ban organized religion
Rich, these are two very poinient ideas.
I can't help but feel that 4 is the way in which the government is going already, and the reason that people object to their physical and personal data being stored, from birth ideally, is that they do not want to be held responsible for their actions, either those that have been conducted or those that are yet to be conceived. In the same ways as you don't fix something that ain't broke, you can't be held accountable for something you didn't do! The evidence held would also act to clear innocent parties and I for one would be more than happy for that to be the case.
The more controversial is 5. Organised religion is blatantly a control over the people who 'choose' to enrol in it. Look at the current world climate. The tension between Eastern religions and Western Christianity continues to be the greatest cause of war - yet all parties are insistent that they are right because their hierarchical figure said so, as written in a 'holy' book. I, personally, am baffled by the beliefs that people hold, and am of the view that if people wanted what was best for everyone, then we would treat each other how we want to be treated ourselves. This in itself brings into question the morality of the minority who would continue to behave in an unacceptable manner, but to be honest this minority do not subscribe to any particular religion anyhow. (Controversially, you could suggest that with the current tensions the minority is choosing to back a particular religion, ostracizing the practicing majority and causing more tension - inciting chaos in a civilized world)
By banning organised religion, you are removing the freedom of choice, as people will always want to establish groups with people who have the same beliefs. You could even go as far as to say that the club could be defined as a religion as there are teachings taking place that we choose to believe and follow. Sure, ironically the club is based on learning an art that has it's roots in war, but could still be construed as such.
I'm all for multiculturalism, but it is my opinion that we have, as a nation, created our own issues by trying to accommodate the world and his dog, and their beliefs. Travelling or indeed settling in another country, as an Englishman, would result in me embracing the traditions and trying to integrate with the locals within the country that I was in. This is obviously encouraged by some of the Middle Eastern countries, by the literal banning of active Christianity. However, in the UK, we seem keen to encourage the isolation of cultures by allowing social groups to practise their own beliefs, and almost create a mini home country within the area of settlement. We are not so much an integrated, multicultural society, as a fragmented society which is experiencing increases in tension. The exception to these examples are the kind of people who are mentally prepared to accept that the colour of skin are indeed the only differences between us at birth, and as such are prepared to learn, accept and incorporate themselves into the environment in which they chose to place themselves.
Tools such as the internet are helping to bring things back together, mostly because it enables people to make contact with and experience different cultures within their living room, without the preconceptions that they may have by peoples appearance, creed etc.
I know that I've babbled on a bit, for which I apologise. Just thought that I'd add a little fuel to the debate.......
I WILL see you all soon, no doubt....
Rich |
|
|
|
Antonik
Old Hand
16 Posts |
Posted - 26/08/2006 : 20:34:41
|
I'm not convinced by your orginal arugment Jon. Yes, if you were on a ship in a strom then you need a defined chain of command of experinced people but democracy is not about running the ship by committee. It is about deciding which expert to put in charge. Each one has a different view about how things should be run and then a consensus is taken over which view is taken for the next however many years. After this, it is seen if it is still agreed that the current way is the best for the time. The decision of a leader effects all and so all have a view about what decisions he takes. One person can also become fixated over one area or carries down a path that is wrong because he cannot see it. By polling the masses you try to even out fixations and, yes, stupid and bad decisions. But you poll to find the group of experts.
"For that which once existed is no more, and that which was not has come to be; and so the whole round of motion is gone through again." Ovid, Metamorphoses |
|
|
|
ivesjz
Banging On A Bit
75 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2006 : 07:48:26
|
Not my argument - Plato's!
I fear though, that a 'true democray', requires a referendum before any action is taken. As such, we in the UK are not a true democracy. I'm not entirely sure what we are....Does anyone know?
=============================================
"Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear? Can you remain unmoving till the right action
arises by itself?"
Lao Tzu (Dao De Ching)
|
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder
Not so Fiendish Admin
106 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2006 : 12:10:04
|
England is a parlimentary constitutional monarchy,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy
Thought it was a touch crazy.
Democracy only works well with people that:
1) Want to be involved in the entire political state (remember that turn out for elections is poor ,32% in the local elections a few years ago and 59% in the last general election)
2)Good comunication, communication is getting easier but conveying the correct message seems almost impossible in politics
Just a few pennies to the mix.
Matt
In Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switerzland they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did they produce? The cuckoo clock
Orson Welles |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Democracy and the club...
