I begin to think that the term 'democracy' is a word with many meanings...

So the reason why this country is sh*tting all over the Aussies for service and quality is what then??

Like I said, people on hand to help me, polite and friendly at all times.

given that the reference was to people driving over other people in tanks, you yet again miss the point and probably do so because it is a moral question and you really just dont get morality.

Muso has just added a few more.

Whatever freedoms you have cannot exist in a political vacuum. There must be some way of assuring and protecting your rights--your freedom, and government is the answer. Even libertarians generally accept this, although they are the most ardent proponents of the maximum freedom, and believe that while government is evil, it is necessary or inevitable.

But not just any government will do. It must be one that not only commands your obedience to its laws, but one that in its very organization embodies what being free means to you. This is democracy. As a concept, "democracy" has not only developed many meanings since its first use by the ancient Greeks, but also meanings once well-established have changed.

You may define democracy by its inherent nature and by its empirical conditions. As to its nature, Aristotle defined democracy as rule by the people (Greek demokratia: demos meaning people + -kratia, -cracy, meaning rule or governing body) and this idea that in some way the people govern themselves is still the core sense of democracy. In the ancient Greek city states and the early Roman Republic democracy meant that people participated directly in governing and making policy. This was possible because of the small populations of these cities, hardly ever more than 10,000 people, and the exclusion of women and slaves from participation. Although limited to free males, this idea of the direct participation of the people in government was the central meaning of democracy up to modern times, and now is usually known as pure or direct democracy.

freediver wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 9:43pm:


Go on believing that if you like. It's the old fallacy of discarding information that's not in your favour. The works of Aristotle are "irrelevant" to you. The works of Thomas Jefferson are also irrelevant, as are the courses on political science at universities throughout the world.

No no, muso made it up, and we'll just call it "appeal to authority".

I'm actually honoured that you think I could make all this up on my own, but I have to be truthful. It's actually abundantly obvious to anybody who has studied political science. I usually veer away from quoting reams of information, but now and again, it helps to get a point across:

Quote:


Source (again)

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/WF.CHAP3.HTM
Once again, freedom is the foundation of democracy AND  democracy is the whole purpose of freedom. They are concepts that are intricately woven together. Erode one and you erode the other. 

The first Greeks had voting only for the leading class of males and it was compulsory to attend it was ignored unless there was not a quorum in which case people were rounded up to attend and then fined for their failure.

Yeah I have no doubt there are dodgy joints.

A capital city of untold millions of people is going to have that isnt it?

I guess my point goes to the law and order.

Cities on a saturday night in the UK and Australia are horrendous - little respect for the police, drunk and disorderly violence and just nasty places to be.

In stark contrast the respect for the People's Army in Beijing is clear and order is kept. The law and order is infinitely better in China than Australia.

Make of that what you will.
I think its a huge positive - maybe because the PRC have not had the touchy-feely social worker element interfere with keeping order which has eroded social acceptance of the police?

Non-Western countries never went through the "post-structural" revolution that castigated authority solely for sake it. The radicals of the 1960s introjected a kind of anarchism into the proceeding generations, which manifests itself today in disrespect for authority of all descriptions - police, parents, teachers, etc.

as an aside I find it difficult to discuss the notions of freedom using the Romans as examples. When women and children were considered property and could be disposed of at will and wehere slaves were even worse off, I dont think 'freedom' was at the core of their society.