[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]

Civil war, theocracy, and/or fascist communism is what we have now? I believe by 'we' he is referring to democratic western governments and if so then that's far from true.

[/ QUOTE ]

For one thats cherry picking. For two, western government recent attempts to bring their prosperity and ideology to other nations has done nothing but result in theocracy and or civil war. Their political medicine only works on people who are already healthy apparently. If you take a sick society, one with ethnic divide or something of the sort, and apply your strategies you'll see democracy is no political weapon towards legitimacy or peace.

What good is democracy if it cant bring light to troubled societies? Isn't that democracies goal?

America is still a theocracy and fascist in many senses too. Personally i dont differentiate religious ideology from most political ideology but even without that i think point still stands.

[ QUOTE ]
Calling it a dictatorship is just silly hyperbole

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to remember the context of our debate. He was saying democracy is good because each gets a turn to get their way.

Further it is a dictatorship when the majority is strong enough. There is nothing to prevent a strong majority from going as far as amending the constitution to allow for sending Jews to concentration camps. This can all be done within the bounds of western democracy.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a thing called division of power including the balance of government branches and of local, state and federal authority.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the division of power should start and end at the individual. The power divide in western democracy that subdivides the power to more localities is an effective way of taking a step closer towards the individual and therefore anarchy. Only so far as this is so will i concede this is effective.

My point is though why do we allow local government to begin with? Because people feel to many are unfairly grouped into federal issues. So they make it more local. At what point do you stop using this point and breaking society into more and more local parts? IMO the only answer is the individual should be the government.

[ QUOTE ]
There is also such a thing as government accountability. We impeached Nixon and members of the federal legistature have been arrested. Law enforcement officers have been punished for abusing their power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Accountability in government exists in a lower form than any other institution. Officials are much more accountable to the people when the people can secede their support whenever they choose. Why do the police have to treat you respectfully when they get paid regardless?

Im not saying government is all bad, im not saying anarchy is all good. Im saying one structures things for more state power while the other structures things for more consumer/individual power and this accounts for likely differences in things like accountability and representation.

[ QUOTE ]

I agree that there are plenty of problems that occur in democracies due to human stupidity, laziness and callousness, but such human flaws will cause plenty of problems with or without government. In democracy at least those too busy to do anything themselves can affect change with their votes.


[/ QUOTE ]

The flaws exist with or without goverment, but government often subdizes those flaws which dont allow for the right incentives for people to overcome those flaws.

Im not sure i understand the point in your last sentence.