What do you think of this statement by Winston Churchill? Do you believe he is correct or do you believe that democracy is the be-all, end-all of all governments? If it is not the evolutionary end of government, what do you think the next evolution will be?
129074
Democracy is the best we've had so far.  I would like to see more direct democracy in the future.\n\nThe converse of democracy is a dictatorship.  There are many advantages to a dictatorship as well.  Countries with dictatorships essentially take a greater gamble.  A democracy will never vote in the best leader for a country, because the average IQ and political knowledge of a country is not great enough to make this decision.  A dictatorship with a perfect leader would enjoy a strong government for the leader's lifetime.\n\nThe problem with a dictatorship is that when a bad leader is in place, or when power gets the better of them, the country is stuck with them.\n\nKeep in mind that the most deadly dictator of our time, Hitler, was born out of a German democracy.  Now, Hitler never won more than 37% of the vote.  Somehow, the majority government fell and handed the power to him by default.  \n\nAll I can say is that we still have a lot to learn about what makes a great government system.\n\n\np.s...I agree with the comments about communism, but must mention that this is a separate issue from democracy.  A Democratic Communist state could theoretically exist, and it may just happen in the future.  Keep in mind that it may be much ado about nothing.  We call ourselves a Capitalist state, but are far from the true meaning of Capitalist.  All in all, we are a mild socialist state.   Likewise, a future Democracic Communist state would likely not be a true communist state, but simply a stronger form of socialist state.\n\nIe.,,,the possible futures of China or Russia.
147394
about a controlling totalitarian govt??\n\nditch the word "controlling" or u can use the term "ruling"\n\n\ntry to make thr first statement in the "not only - but also" form.\n\nGeorge Orwell’s "1984" is not only about a controlling totalitarian government, but also about one man's....\n\noverthrow an opposing govt..??? why would he want to overthrow a govt not in power??\n\nleader's control "over" a nation "using" fear.\n\norwell's novel is a forewarning (ditch the "is a beckon") as to what "would" happen if an induvidual comes to power and the costs to retain power.\n\n\nthe world is created, in resemblance "to" Russia,during...\n\n\ntoday's society . The "suppression"\n(would be more appropriate)\n of freedom caused misery among the people of Oceania and thus they sought a revolution.\n\n\nPls edit the last para (Big brother.... at any given moment)..makes little sense.\n\nmy idea : \nBig brother hears any sound that Winston makes and any sound louder than a whisper is picked up. And as long as he remained within the range of the metal plate, he could be seen and heard.  \n\n\n\nfinally..\nIn the novel, orwell uses the concept of communism and it's effect on the people.\n\n\n\n\nWell.. those were all the possible suggestions i could give u. Some of my suggestions can be dropped since i have no idea about this passage's context (George Orwell's 1984) .
132390
Very good quotes,  If you think those are scary try reading the Declearation of independence.  \n"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government"\n\nWhat does you question have to do with Bush suporters?
429493
Still waiting for intelligent answers? I hope people are just busy typing, after the first two I saw.\nI have to say, I agree with you- we need the checks and balances back in our government. Stagnation was going on, and I think a few of us were about ready to take to the streets in rebellion. It's kind of a shame the way you have to MAKE people act right. I think we will see more cooperation, less arrogance now that they have gotten the wake up call of the elections. I am hopeful.
91327
Yes.  Democracy encompasses more than just geographical borders.  It is a philosophy that is largely built upon the foundation of law, and freedom of choice.  As long as men continue to value individual freedom and freethinking there will be democracy.  I don't foresee a world filled with dark, gothic, Batman-like figures devouring the poor without a fight.  That's how France and America became great anyway.  Don't forget.  Lights of liberty we all must be.
603827
The beginning of the end for the whole world passed milleniums ago.  The very end of existence for this planet will probably end in the next 100 years when a giant meteor smashes into the ground, but at least that will be out of our lifetimes!\n\nBush is not smart enough to be a new Hitler but maybe his puppetmaster behind the curtain, Dick Cheney will become one.
226215
Quote; "Anyone who starves themselves over any cause is stupid. Can't change things when you are dead, so yes the death was in vain. Even a gator could figure that out."\n\nGator has obviously never heard of Bobby Sands or the other 9 Irish Hunger strikers of 1981. As a result of their sacrifice, Bobby Sands was elected to Parliament while still on hunger strike, hundreds of people joined the IRA and the Good Friday Agreement was signed. Among other things, the Good Friday Agreement forced the brits to share governmental power with Irish Republicans AND forced the brits to release ALL IRA prisoners from their prisons! Don't tell me they died in vain. They were locked away in a prison, with no weapons, yet managed to change the whole course of Irish history.\n  Sadly, I must admit that I know nothing of Subhas Srivastava. But he has got people talking. And I will read up on him and his cause. So be sure, he did not die in vain.
503627
no, if it became a democracy it would be the end of us all, the founding fathers knew this when they formed the government.
606929
The future of the United States is bright, indeed.  I had doubts a short while back, but people are remembering how to speak up.\nWe will always be powerful, perhaps the top superpower, but we will never try to stop someone from being more successful if they have their people's interests at heart.  Oh, we'll protect our interests, but we have always cheered the success of other countries who serve their people first and their ideology last.   Should everyone be a capitalist, a representative democratic republic?  I don't think so, but there are going to be more, and we'll have to compete with them, and I'll love every second of it.  Competition that isn't based on the slavery of a people (like China is close to) is to be commended and encouraged.\n\nIf there is another superpower that grows above us, I suspect that we'll have a hand in making it that way.  After all, we've been helping all our "older brothers" (older countries) for some time now.  It would be nice if they could do it on their own so we could enjoy our youth and riches a bit more.  \n\nEuropean Union?  Go for it!  China getting more democratic and keeping it's power?  We're with you!  Russia regaining world attention but remaining a people-first state?  Great!\n\nWe'll be there, probably contentedly resting on our laurels until we're woken again.  For now, we're awake and stomping our feet on the one's who woke us up unjustly.  After they're dust, we'll go back to slumber and do business as usual, but we'll never be less than a giant.
25538
For me, the statement says that survival is a very noble cause, and we should support all those who protect our country, and do so in every way we can.\n\nBut survival and protection is not the same as destruction, and we shouldn't try to be the world's bully. I'm all for excellent defense, but let's keep the offense to a minimum.
71990
I see what you are getting at but, "The Seeds Of Human Abuse" has been around soo long that, we as Humans have evolved to learn new safeguards of "Hatred,Religious in-differences,& Political Pawns that help create War. I truly believe that, if we are to continue as a species of Educated & Decisive creatures, then we as Humans have to conform to other resources to (Clean-Up) our activities with Cleaner & Safer alternatives to fuel & Protect our Planets waste. Hatred is such a useless word that it prevents people from attaining their reall goals in life.We do have a big problem w/our Politicians & Diplomats World Wide. It seems fair to say that, A Politicians Life & a Diplomats Lives are somewhat exatly the same. They have learned from (Old School) ways to decieve the public in getting exatly what they want, but not for the very people that put them there to report if our goals for Global Unity have been met. t's really sad to say but, The Churches all seem to want to say that their Religion is better than the next, & really not passing the words of Faith. They should (Walk Their Talk). It would be nice if the World as we know it were one Goverment w/no Boarders.We are stuct w/all the lies that were ever told by our World Leaders.The only way that we can come clean is to have (One World United Goverment w/no Boarders) One for all,all for one.
642799
there is this "idea" that democracy is good and other types of government are bad and/or evil.  no one system of government is inherently good or evil, but that just not how it is viewed.  i'm a little more curious as to why america thinks it can "teach" democracy with bombs and force....but then historically what we see more of is the idea that america teaches a system of rule that supports the US is more what it means, be it a democracy or dictator.
553106
Good point. Are we supposed to read between the lines with a politician of one party but not the other? Let's see...Kerry's statement could have been misconstrued as an arrogant belief about the intellect of soldiers, if you are looking for it. And the president's statement could be taken to mean that the masses need to be controlled by the government. Hmm. I'd say look at the big picture.
447274
Hass J, You ask an important question, and you deserve a respectful answer.\n\nWinston Churchill once said, "Democracy is the worst form of government -- except for all the rest."\n\nThe legendary journalist, H. L. Mencken once said, "Democracy is the theory that the common man knows what he wants, and deserves to get it -- good and hard!"\n\nThe sentiments in your question are the core issues that have animated political philosophy since the days of Socrates. How best to govern. People like Socrates and Plato believed that the people couldn't be trusted because they were basically ignorant; and therefore Democracy leads to mob rule. They argued for the rule of the "rational elite."\n\nLater, men like John Locke argued that since the people have to live with the policies of government; and since all sovereignty flows from the the people anyway, the people have the absolute rights.\n\nThe problem is, both groups are correct. The people are the ones who have to pay, and therefore they should have a right in determining the people who make them do the paying. And yet, most people don't pay close attention to politics, and therefore are subject to stupid rhetoric that has no basis in fact. And this leads to fools being elected to powerful offices.\n\nActually I think Clint E is being conservative in his estimates. I think the figure is actually closer to 50%. In most presidential election years, you're lucky if you get half of the electorate to show up. And when they do, there's no guarantee that the decisions they make weren't based on hearing some stupid 30 second sound-bite on TV. \n\nThe answer is education. People have to made aware of the consequences of being uninformed. It's not that people are retarded -- it's that they ACT like they're retarded. That's why some of us come on forums like this. We're trying to raise levels of awareness.\n\nSuperior Question. Hope this answer helps. \n\nCheers, mate
218164
Any type of government is a game for politicians, no matter how you look at it. And not all of us think democracy is good, I don't. After all, it got George Bush elected. Besides, democracy is basically one of the easiest games for liars, and we certainly have a lot of them in this society. We Americans tend to push our views on other people, we're like the big bullies of the playground. We refuse to see other societies views. Sometimes what seems the best isn't.
21394
"Given where mankind has achieved from even the year 1901 to now where can man go or achieve by 2101?"\nWho knows, maybe our "superiority" will lead us to finally blow ourselves up. :-P\nI absolutely agree with Professor Beatz; I only wish to add one thing. You make it sound as if the whole evolutionary process is a matter of random events. In fact, randomization occurs in the generation of variability (mutations, crossing-over), but natural selection is not random. Evolution does not have a purpose, but neither is it aleatory.\nAlso, evolution is not a "one-time deal" unless you are considering it as a process leading to humans. That is arrogant. \nAnd thinking that evolutionary processes in other places of the universe will work as they did here and lead to human-like beings is more arrogant, in my opinion.
353499
Funny, there was this one guy 2,000 years ago who said love everyone, don't judge, and follow the Golden Rule. It's a shame that "leaders" don't listen to him anymore.