Thread: Bерите в демократию? / Do you believe in Democracy?

Just wanting to start a discussion on whether people here have faith in democracy, and think it is generally the best way to run your own country, or other countries..
Cast your vote in the poll and explain your view!

I used to believe in democracy, but at the moment I feel as it is a bit of a hoax.

-In most countries, almost half of the eligible population do not vote - either because they are not qualified, or because the do not care...
-In many countries like the USA or UK there are only two political parties that there is any point voting for - and they are both quite similar.
-Democracy means that important decisions may be stalled
-Votes can be "bought" either through expensive marketing campaigns that sway the opinions of gullible people, control of media or by locking people into positions of dependency that means that they are forced to vote for whatever party upholds the privileges that they are dependant on economically.
-In some "democracies", like Russia, many people have no faith in the democracy...
-Many people are simply not sufficiently intelligent or well educated to cast a reasonably informed vote.


But are there any alternatives that are superior?
Is democracy the lesser of two evils?

Hoping for a discussion in Russian and English with the views of people from different parts of the world!

Я в демократию не верю.

Originally Posted by Marcus

Я в демократию не верю.

What type of system do you support?

In Greece, the birth place of democracy, they are trying to form a government based on the below results....
Meanwhile everyone else in Europe has an opinion about what should happen, not to mention the financial institutions.
No telling what will happen.

A funny poll. About a thing that doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by Ramil

A funny poll. About a thing that doesn't exist.

You old cynic!

FYI - there is now democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq...........lol...............

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Is Democracy a religion to be believed in?

Yes, I think most Americans and Western Europeans "believe" a lot more in democracy than they do in God....

One of the reasons everyone in Europe is so upset about Syria, Libya etc is... "there is no democracy there!"

Originally Posted by Hanna

You old cynic!

FYI - there is now democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq...........lol...............

You young cynic!

Originally Posted by Crocodile

You young cynic!

you flatter me, mr crocodile

So it was not the superior democracy that lured you from the USSR to Canada........?

Perhaps it's more a case of you prefer one type of dictatorship over another?

Originally Posted by Hanna

you flatter me, mr crocodile

So it was not the superior democracy that lured you from the USSR to Canada........?

Perhaps it's more a case of you prefer one type of dictatorship over another?

No, it was the "sausage" like I explained earlier.
I'm not a political dissident who just couldn't have enough freedom.

Originally Posted by Hanna

You old cynic!

FYI - there is now democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq...........lol...............

Oh, that. I have another name for it, but if that's what you wish to call it, then yes, I agree.

Originally Posted by Hanna

One of the reasons everyone in Europe is so upset about Syria, Libya etc is... "there is no democracy there!"

But soon there will be. I'm sure of it. Democratic bombs will fall upon any non-democratic house, I'm sure!

Is Democracy a religion to be believed in?

Originally Posted by Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Pretty much sums it up as far as I'm concerned. Under any system there will always be a bunch of bastards at the top table. Democracy just ensures that no particular set of bastards ever gets too comfortable there.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Is Democracy a religion to be believed in?

Снежный человек - это религия? Нет. Но в него можно верить или не верить.
Для многих демократия - это именно религия.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Is Democracy a religion to be believed in?

Originally Posted by Marcus

Снежный человек - это религия? Нет. Но в него можно верить или не верить.
Для многих демократия - это именно религия.

this is minute difference as god was witnessed by selected few just like the Big Foot and there's no independent credible 100% reliable evidence of their existence, so the notion of belief equally applies to both

for those who never lived under democracy it maybe hard to comprehend that it's really possible, but you don't have to rely on hearsay as in the case of god and the Big Foot, you can see it in action with your own eyes and feel on your own flesh

yeah it's not perfect but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Is Democracy a religion to be believed in?

In the minds words of many politicians - it is. As well as in the minds of many non-politicians. This propaganda trick is called 'substitution of notions'. Today, 'no democracy' means 'evil, not right, wrong'

Originally Posted by Ramil

In the minds words of many politicians - it is. As well as in the minds of many non-politicians. This propaganda trick is called 'substitution of notions'. Today, 'no democracy' means 'evil, not right, wrong'

No, I don't think so. I think it's generally believed that oppression and violence by the state are "evil, not right, wrong", and that democracy is (and has historically been) the best method of preventing such. No substitutions of notions necessary.

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

No, I don't think so. I think it's generally believed that oppression and violence by the state are "evil, not right, wrong", and that democracy is (and has historically been) the best method of preventing such. No substitutions of notions necessary.

You don't see anything wrong with 'no democracy = oppression and violence' do you? And of course, where democracy is there's no place for oprression and violence...

Originally Posted by Ramil

You don't see anything wrong with 'no democracy = oppression and violence' do you? And of course, where democracy is there's no place for oprression and violence...

I didn't say that [no democracy = oppression and violence] or that [democracy = no oppression and violence]. I said that "I think it's generally believed... that democracy is (and has historically been) the best method of preventing such".

Saying that something is the least-worst option does not imply that it is the only one, or that it is a sufficient condition on its own.

Originally Posted by Ramil

In the minds words of many politicians - it is. As well as in the minds of many non-politicians. This propaganda trick is called 'substitution of notions'. Today, 'no democracy' means 'evil, not right, wrong'

it's just political correctness

but lack of democracy indeed means lack of many personal freedoms, if the nation is ok with such state of affairs fine

still almost nobody emigrates from the West to non-democratic countries however prosperous they are, not in masses for certain, why? If we discount various bureaucratic barriers and personal issues it's simply because under relatively healthy democracy you enjoy both personal freedoms and economic prosperity, who in his right mind would give up on that?

Originally Posted by LXNDR

it's just political correctness

but lack of democracy indeed means lack of many personal freedoms, if the nation is ok with such state of affairs fine

Democracy doesn't automatically provide personal freedoms, etc. Democracy in its classic definition only declares that all people can participate in forming of the national policy. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not say that there must be any personal freedoms except that everyone can elect and be elected.
All other 'implied' meanings are attributed to democracy by illiterate politicians and their even more illiterate followers.

still almost nobody emigrates from the West to non-democratic countries however prosperous they are, not in masses for certain, why?

Simply because people prefer to emigrate to more prosperous countries than their own and nobody wishes to emigrate to less wealthy countries. And don't even try to give all credit for the well-being of 'the West' to the fact they have seemingly 'democratic' political systems. There are other democracies as well (Pakistan, Lebannon, Mexico... lol even Greece - the most 'prosperous' country in the EU) and they're not going to be any wealthier than they are now in the nearest future. Economic well-being of the country has nothing to do with democracy.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Democracy doesn't automatically provide personal freedoms, etc. Democracy in its classic definition only declares that all people can participate in forming of the national policy. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not say that there must be any personal freedoms except that everyone can elect and be elected.
All other 'implied' meanings are attributed to democracy by illiterate politicians and their even more illiterate followers.

and it's enough to have formed humanistic socially oriented national policy if that's what the majority wants and what the politicians are able to provide
under other types of political system what the majority wants isn't taken into consideration

Originally Posted by Ramil

Simply because people prefer to emigrate to more prosperous countries than their own and nobody wishes to emigrate to less wealthy countries. And don't even try to give all credit for the well-being of 'the West' to the fact they have seemingly 'democratic' political systems. There are other democracies as well (Pakistan, Lebannon, Mexico... lol even Greece - the most 'prosperous' country in the EU) and they're not going to be any wealthier than they are now in the nearest future. Economic well-being of the country has nothing to do with democracy.

and i don't, in my post i didn't conditioned one by the other i just combined them, clearly if there weren't any undemocratic countries as wealthy as the Western or wealthier yet my argument about emigration from the West wouldn't make sense