Identity
Filter
Visitors
(1) (0) (52) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (61) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
(0)
Highest posts
Latest posts
Links
Blogs
Democracy
ACTA alert!
Search
[top-politics] Re: What do we all agree about in this very time?
-
29/05/06 19:05
echarp wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 04:34:17AM -0700, illegale wrote:
OK. Though, I do not find this part of discussion be to productive, so I will pass it to the moment I find it important.echarp wrote:
A few centuries for any political system is huge!The Athenian direct democracy was probably not crushed due to intrinsicreasons, but because the Athenians were imperialistic slave owners whoengaged in wars. The Peloponnesian war was reason enough to weaken them.On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 04:10:53AM -0700, illegale wrote:
OK. Yet, what gets me interested are those systems, those principesstrong enough to adopt during history. Autopoietical concepts thatlast, at least for a little longer.echarp wrote:
Everything will collapse, even the universe.The Athenians were the true revolutionaries, we wasted 2 millenniums,rationalizing why we all couldn’t do what they did.
Athenians collapsed. That is not good characteristic.
OK. Though, one man, one vote has not much to the concept of liberty IMO. Nevertheless, as long as I do not find this part of discussion too important in this very time, I will pass it also.
No one will openly go against liberty. Yet, discounting most ofhumanity for exemple (as Mark does), is a negation of liberty. One manone vote!
So, is there any one against liberty? Is there any system that isagainst liberty? If you name one (I do not know what is up wit nazzistuff) I will acknowledge it. If there is no one, than it seems to methat you are using concepts that buzz the essence which is not good.
Well, for example I consider that the talk about Direct Democracy versusRepresentative Democracy can be a matter of liberty. Because direct is_more_ potent than indirect, it allows me more liberty.See, matters of degree yes, but still reasons why liberty is important.“La liberté finit la où commence la liberté d’autrui”(liberty ends where start the liberty of other)
Yet, is there any other system that denies liberty? If there is no suchsystem, liberty as a concept is not needed.
I do not doubt about it. What I did doubt is the stenght of the message of the word Liberty to the level if buzz creation. This word is on the level to the word DEMOCRACY. Saddam Husein is a democrat, George Bush is a democrat, HU Jintao is a demorat, meaning Democracy is prostituted word with no true power. What interests me are the worde that have true power, words that can not be missinterpreted.
Liberty: no limitation on one’s actions, unless they actively harm others.Equality: no discrimination by birth, ethnie, religion, fortune…Fraternity: requirement to help those in dire need.(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law)At the very least, those are interesting principles.Plus, considering that to me it is the foundation of everything I dohere, I’d rather not put it aside :)Liberté Égalité Fraternité
Your right.
Everthing else is a meaningless mess, feaders ment for those we want to change.
ATB,
Galeecharp – http://leparlement.org
-~-~————-~—~——~——————~———-~—~——~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics~————-~——~——~——~———~——~———~—~—-
+1
New discussion
Answer
-
29/05/06 22:40
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 10:05:29AM -0700, illegale wrote:
echarp wrote:
I agree that whether the Athenians democracy was a success or not will not change the fact that a Direct Democracy will or will not be successful.The Athenian direct democracy was probably not crushed due to intrinsicreasons, but because the Athenians were imperialistic slave owners whoengaged in wars. The Peloponnesian war was reason enough to weaken them.
OK. Though, I do not find this part of discussion be to productive, soI will pass it to the moment I find it important.Success is a very tricky thing to define. Does it need to be eternal? Could it not simply be useful to its users?
OK. Though, one man, one vote has not much to the concept of libertyIMO. Nevertheless, as long as I do not find this part of discussion tooimportant in this very time, I will pass it also.
I’m sure you will agree with the fact that voting in order to carve our future in society is a matter of liberty.
Is it not also true, if only in degree, when considering direct or indirect votes?
Words can always be misinterpreted.Liberty: no limitation on one’s actions, unless they actively harm others.
I do not doubt about it. What I did doubt is the stenght of the messageof the word Liberty to the level if buzz creation. This word is on thelevel to the word DEMOCRACY. Saddam Husein is a democrat, George Bushis a democrat, HU Jintao is a demorat, meaning Democracy is prostitutedword with no true power. What interests me are the worde that have truepower, words that can not be missinterpreted.
If you stop using words with such history and force as liberty and democracy, because others you disapprove use them, then you are only caving to them. You are abandoning them the very concepts that you could use as foundations.
echarp – http://leparlement.org
-~-~————-~—~——~——————~———-~—~——~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics~————-~——~——~——~———~——~———~—~—-
+1
New discussion
Answer
-
29/05/06 22:53
Transparency is the word that is being used by everybody, yet there are exact things that can say is some organisaiton transparent or not. This stuff makes transparency become pretty powerfull concept as long as it clearly distincts. It is the same with opennes, or public. That is the reason I completelly accept these words not finding them empty wors. Maybe it is he same thinbg with democracy or liberty, yet in all time over discussion over these words, what made me think is that these concepts actually can get disolved in much more articulated concepts that make these abstractions actually not interesting.
ATB,
Gale-~-~————-~—~——~——————~———-~—~——~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics~————-~——~——~——~———~——~———~—~—-
+1
New discussion
Answer
-
31/05/06 14:51
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 01:53:52PM
0700, illegale wrote:)Transparency is the word that is being used by everybody, yet there areexact things that can say is some organisaiton transparent or not. Thisstuff makes transparency become pretty powerfull concept as long as itclearly distincts. It is the same with opennes, or public. That isthe reason I completelly accept these words not finding them emptywors.
It is us, cultural beings, who define what a word contains or not :Maybe it is he same thinbg with democracy or liberty, yet in all timeover discussion over these words, what made me think is that theseconcepts actually can get disolved in much more articulated concepts
It is the same with any word. You need to define it before hand. And any body can define it differently and use it in their own context.
Many scholars are trying to define what democracy exactly is. Very often they use some kinds of criteria, like votes, freedom of thought, freedom of association, counting procedures, electoral lists and number of participants, …
Liberty is an older concept with plenty of works to define it, yet it’s still open to many interpretations. Me for example, I consider that philosophical liberty does not exist, that we are all strongly pre determined. But there is political liberty which is a very interesting idea indeed.
Yes, sometimes usage of a word will shift, it’s a constant fight, yet it’s sometimes worth debating over.
echarp – http://leparlement.org/top-politics
-~-~————-~—~——~——————~———-~—~——~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics~————-~——~——~——~———~——~———~—~—-
+1
New discussion
Answer
-
01/06/06 03:09
echarp wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 01:53:52PM
Of course.0700, illegale wrote:)Transparency is the word that is being used by everybody, yet there areexact things that can say is some organisaiton transparent or not. Thisstuff makes transparency become pretty powerfull concept as long as itclearly distincts. It is the same with opennes, or public. That isthe reason I completelly accept these words not finding them emptywors.
It is us, cultural beings, who define what a word contains or not :
OK. Yet, I’ll try to look from this site. We aproach to some group of the people pointing out democracy and liberty, justice and stuff. If we can not clearly present difference and its point to other political groups, than we are missing our agitation power. That is all. I have nothing against liberty, nor freedom, yet I am looking for the clear distinctions that empower us. That is all.Maybe it is he same thinbg with democracy or liberty, yet in all timeover discussion over these words, what made me think is that theseconcepts actually can get disolved in much more articulated concepts
It is the same with any word. You need to define it before hand. And anybody can define it differently and use it in their own context.
Many scholars are trying to define what democracy exactly is. Very oftenthey use some kinds of criteria, like votes, freedom of thought, freedomof association, counting procedures, electoral lists and number ofparticipants, …Liberty is an older concept with plenty of works to define it, yet it’sstill open to many interpretations. Me for example, I consider thatphilosophical liberty does not exist, that we are all strongly predetermined. But there is political liberty which is a very interestingidea indeed.
And there is a problem, actually. Liberty can be interpreted in many ways, it can be also denied by determinists, at least, liberty as commonly acknowledged term. Of course, I already mentioned. I have no problem with this term, though, we need to articulate it in proper fluent manner and see is this what differs us, is this what make us powerfull on the base of idea.
Yes, sometimes usage of a word will shift, it’s a constant fight, yetit’s sometimes worth debating over.
OK. We can do it and probably will do it.
ATB,
Galeecharp – http://leparlement.org/top-politics
-~-~————-~—~——~——————~———-~—~——~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics~————-~——~——~——~———~——~———~—~—-
+1
New discussion
Answer
-
01/06/06 03:09
-
31/05/06 14:51
-
29/05/06 22:53
-
29/05/06 22:40