Income inequality
- Skyweir
- Lord of Light
- Posts: 25406
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
- Location: Australia
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 18 times
I still believe in a democracy the government should. I never said it DOES. As that is obvious.
But yes Av .. if the people dont like it they can throw in with someone else.
I mean you wouldnt have Trump today if it werent for the people voting him in. He represents and is supposedly doing what his voters want. Thats kinda the travesty of democracy .. its not about right or wrong, regrettably.. it rarely ever is.
Governments dont have to serve its people, so long as it pleases its majority.
But yes Av .. if the people dont like it they can throw in with someone else.
I mean you wouldnt have Trump today if it werent for the people voting him in. He represents and is supposedly doing what his voters want. Thats kinda the travesty of democracy .. its not about right or wrong, regrettably.. it rarely ever is.
Governments dont have to serve its people, so long as it pleases its majority.
keep smiling
'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
EZBoard SURVIVOR
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
Hashi Lebwohl wrote:What happens when the majority are wrong?Skyweir wrote:Governments dont have to serve its people, so long as it pleases its majority.
Once upon a time the majority of people believed that sacrificing a child would appease the gods....
The republic.Skyweir wrote:That is PRECISELY the problem with democracy no?
But what better system is there?
A system of government where the people do not make decisions directly but by a set of proxies for whom they vote with laws in place preventing the majority from abusing the minority.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
- Skyweir
- Lord of Light
- Posts: 25406
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
- Location: Australia
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 18 times
How many proxies are representative of how many people?
Cos what you have described sounds not that dissimilar to what exists today.
However your President Id argue has more power that our PM.
Does the republic model you described include a President?
Cos what you have described sounds not that dissimilar to what exists today.
However your President Id argue has more power that our PM.
Does the republic model you described include a President?
keep smiling
'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
EZBoard SURVIVOR
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
How many proxies? *shrug* Depends upon the people in question. Republics do not have to include a President but it does make sense to separate powers.
As an experiment in my political science class back in university I devised a government having only a Legislative and Judicial branches but all legislation had to pass with a 2/3 supermajority and all laws were subject to being sunset after 10 years, requiring them to be renewed at that time. Most of the class did not like my idea but I thought it was great.
As an experiment in my political science class back in university I devised a government having only a Legislative and Judicial branches but all legislation had to pass with a 2/3 supermajority and all laws were subject to being sunset after 10 years, requiring them to be renewed at that time. Most of the class did not like my idea but I thought it was great.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
- Wosbald
- A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
- Posts: 6146
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
- Been thanked: 2 times
+JMJ+
Talking with a Friend Who Fears Francis [Opinion]
Talking with a Friend Who Fears Francis [Opinion]
Regarding the CRISIS piece on Francis' alleged socialist agenda, I find it hard to buy for a couple of reasons.
First of all, it assumes as a matter of course that anything socialist is, ipso facto, absolutely incompatible with the faith. This, according to no less an authority than Benedict XVI, is not true. Here is his discussion of socialism in First Things:
Benedict, in fact, hails from a country which, pretty much like the rest of Europe, has adopted quite a number of social support networks that function just fine and that are, as he notes, quite compatible with Catholic teaching. Every one of these systems would be categorically condemned as 'socialist' by the American right and by the writers and readers of CRISIS. Indeed, the entire English-speaking world as well has adopted what American bishops have literally been demanding for a century; universal health care, which the Church teaches is a human right and we alone still treat as a privilege and condemn as 'socialist'. It has resulted in, among other things, a health care system where diabetics like me are literally being murdered by insulin costs that force the poor to ration -- and die as a result. And that is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the madness of our medical system. Meanwhile, the Trump Administration wants to completely destroy Obamacare and has no plans to replace it while also stealing billions from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in order to pay for the trillion and half in money he and his party just gave to the 1 percent.But in Europe, in the nineteenth century, the two models were joined by a third, socialism, which quickly split into two different branches, one totalitarian and the other democratic. Democratic socialism managed to fit within the two existing models as a welcome counterweight to the radical liberal positions, which it developed and corrected. It also managed to appeal to various denominations. In England it became the political party of the Catholics, who had never felt at home among either the Protestant conservatives or the liberals. In Wilhelmine Germany, too, Catholic groups felt closer to democratic socialism than to the rigidly Prussian and Protestant conservative forces. In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctrine and has in any case made a remarkable contribution to the formation of a social consciousness.
If we are going to worry about socialism, I say we should attack the socialism of the rich that is the hallmark of the party of Trump, not the 'socialism' of the poor that is simply the Church's teaching on the common good.
So since there is nothing necessarily incompatible about Catholic teaching about certain aspects of socialism, the question has to be asked, what exactly is Francis saying or doing that is contrary to the faith? I don't see anything. What I see is offended American conservatives at CRISIS defending the perks of the super-wealthy.
[...]
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
The Trump Administration is not stealing billions from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid so it can give that money to the 1%. That is pure bullshit, which means the rest of the opinion article is pure bullshit, as well.
"Democratic Socialism" is nothing but newspeak for "we want everyone to be in de facto slavery to the government, dependent upon an all-powerful parent for all their needs". Religion should be engaged in the process of making people free, not advocating complete subservience to the government.
"Democratic Socialism" is nothing but newspeak for "we want everyone to be in de facto slavery to the government, dependent upon an all-powerful parent for all their needs". Religion should be engaged in the process of making people free, not advocating complete subservience to the government.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
- Skyweir
- Lord of Light
- Posts: 25406
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
- Location: Australia
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 18 times
Its perspective.. and perspective is always subjective.
Outsiders ie non government observers .. looking at the administrations policies are struggling to reconcile tax breaks that benefit the narrow group of exceptionally wealthy recipients... and see social policies being eroded in their realities .. ie faced with the costs of insulin for example. Such are struggling to see how THEY are benefiting.. when they are not.
I can see how the Catholic Church can view social democracies as aligning with Catholicism.
Outsiders ie non government observers .. looking at the administrations policies are struggling to reconcile tax breaks that benefit the narrow group of exceptionally wealthy recipients... and see social policies being eroded in their realities .. ie faced with the costs of insulin for example. Such are struggling to see how THEY are benefiting.. when they are not.
I can see how the Catholic Church can view social democracies as aligning with Catholicism.
keep smiling
'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
EZBoard SURVIVOR
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
- Wosbald
- A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
- Posts: 6146
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
- Been thanked: 2 times
+JMJ+
Assuming I'm reading you aright, I'd say that the aim of "religion" -- or at least, of Catholicity -- is to free people from sin, not to free people from government (or from whatever one's ideological bogeyman may be).Hashi Lebwohl wrote:... Religion should be engaged in the process of making people free, not advocating complete subservience to the government.
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
Technically, yes, since religion cannot--and should not--control the secular government.Wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
Assuming I'm reading you aright, I'd say that the aim of "religion" -- or at least, of Catholicity -- is to free people from sin, not to free people from government (or from whatever one's ideological bogeyman may be).Hashi Lebwohl wrote:... Religion should be engaged in the process of making people free, not advocating complete subservience to the government.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3340
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
- Wosbald
- A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
- Posts: 6146
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
- Been thanked: 2 times
+JMJ+
That is, unless one sees government as alien to people, alien to humanity -- an oppressive force inhibiting human flourishing.
Seems to me that "freeing people from sin" would necessarily include "freeing government from sin" in its ambit.Hashi Lebwohl wrote:Technically, yes, since religion cannot--and should not--control the secular government.Wosbald wrote:Assuming I'm reading you aright, I'd say that the aim of "religion" -- or at least, of Catholicity -- is to free people from sin, not to free people from government (or from whatever one's ideological bogeyman may be).Hashi Lebwohl wrote:... Religion should be engaged in the process of making people free, not advocating complete subservience to the government.
That is, unless one sees government as alien to people, alien to humanity -- an oppressive force inhibiting human flourishing.
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
That is exactly how I see government--large, centralized governments have never been anything but the means through which career politicians have abused their own citizens or engaged in wars against other nations.Wosbald wrote: That is, unless one sees government as alien to people, alien to humanity -- an oppressive force inhibiting human flourishing.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.