Ending Bourgeois Western Democracy

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
Winston Churchill
Read more at www.brainyquote.com...


This is true. Most people are idiots. Western populations cant be trusted with democracy anyway. We gave it a chance but democracy failed. Its time to move on.




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by HenryNorris
 

Well, that's the best argument then for the Representative Republic we actually are. America has never been a democracy in the definition of that and in this context that really does matter.

Economically, it's been more an Oligarchy for quite some time now and turning more and more away from Capitalism to central control all the time. That started with a high speed turn around 06/07 with Bush although really, it could be said it started after 9/11 with the artificial bail-out of the Airlines. I recall well how they were doing pretty badly before 9/11 and it actually worked in their favor in a warped kinda way.

The important point here is, we haven't seen Capitalism in much of anything in over 10 years in ANY serious way and it's been gradually slipping for decades. NAFTA... CAFTA... the efforts both successful and failed have been nonstop and helping to lead to the failure it's all about to come to. Show me Capitalism and the Republic form of Government isn't the problem.

They ARE two separate things, too.

edit on 15-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by HenryNorris
 

Well, that's the best argument then for the Representative Republic we actually are. America has never been a democracy in the definition of that and in this context that really does matter.

Economically, it's been more an Oligarchy for quite some time now and turning more and more away from Capitalism to central control all the time. That started with a high speed turn around 06/07 with Bush although really, it could be said it started after 9/11 with the artificial bail-out of the Airlines. I recall well how they were doing pretty badly before 9/11 and it actually worked in their favor in a warped kinda way.

The important point here is, we haven't seen Capitalism in much of anything in over 10 years in ANY serious way and it's been gradually slipping for decades. NAFTA... CAFTA... the efforts both successful and failed have been nonstop and helping to lead to the failure it's all about to come to. Show me Capitalism and the Republic form of Government isn't the problem.

They ARE two separate things, too.

edit on 15-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)


I think America needs to move to State Capitalism. State Capitalism is what works. State Capitalism protects the peoples asstes and utlilities and also affords the public incredible infrastructure. Much of Asia looks like a sci fi movie these days. They are so far ahead already in many ways.

State Capitalism works best without the constant instability and confusion that is western democracy. Democracy as we know it has to go.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by HenryNorris
 


I'll concede that official U.S. rhetoric & policy toward China is occasionally a load of hypocrisy. When Sec. State Clinton criticizes China on human rights violations I'm often reminded of the elitist proverb, "Do as I say & not as I do." And despite my misgivings about "state capitalism" (I'll get to that in a moment) you do, in my opinion, make valid points about failures of Western governments in general. The point is not far removed from observations that U.S. citizens from a variety of political backgrounds have expressed dismay, frustration, anger, etc. toward. And so my less-than-subtle point is that multiple times zones or whatever have not diminished Westerners' ability to recognize & campaign against the same BS you recognize from Asia.

I'm uncertain about this "state capitalism" you've made a point of repeating. I'm assuming it is a political, economic order, but I'm uncertain what you have in mind in terms of state capitalism's structure and processes. At any rate your favorable outlook on "State Capitalism" seems to fix on what you've written here:


State Capitalism protects the peoples asstes and utlilities and also affords the public incredible infrastructure.


Off the top of my head I can think of instances where state alone has not lived up to this picturesque exemplar. These instances center on historical examples; moreover, history proves nothing. Inductively, however, I contend that history is notorious for repeating itself in one guise or another. But I'll not digress too far from my initial train of thought & get to my questions.

1) Why is it necessary or preferable that a state provide infrastructure (i.e. public goods)?

2) Why is it necessary or preferable that a state protect people's assets & utilities?

I have no weighted disagreement with your disdain toward democracy. While I'm not "insulted" by democracy as you are I do believe that democracy is intrinsically flawed. Bear in mind that statement is not a silent concession in favor of what you call state capitalism. In a less-than compact sense I believe democracy is flawed given that a vote is a means of infringing on another's "assets and utilities" on a broad scale. But on a more ... direct tone I have the impression you are dancing around the term "private property" in favor of "assets and utilities." And, provided my suspicion is even correct, it is the idea of private that, maybe, does not work well with state capitalism. But I dunno. Please correct my suspicion if it is wrong.
edit on 15-1-2013 by Kovenov because: changed "in" to "from"
edit on 16-1-2013 by Kovenov because: (no reason given)


Added: archive.org...
edit on 16-1-2013 by Kovenov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Oh China,learn to live like ants,the ultimate copyright thieves.They have a carrier so now their planes can crash into ours on the high seas.
You are about to be contained.I'm afraid you have made entirely too much noise and our maniacal leadership is looking for another opponent. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Kovenov
 


Hey, thanks for reading and responding.

And yeah, I like State Capitalism because in Australia in the 80's the government owned more stuff and I think it was better for the public. Now we have gone more like America and I think its wrong. We used to be proud of our medicare system but now because of American thinking people are made to feel like moochers if they dont have private health insuraance. And we are forced onto it anyway. And its not just healthcare that this Amercan libertarian corporatist think hurts.

Governments that own utilities that bring revenue as well as offer services and infrastructure is what I think is best. American thinking is to privatize everything and be at the wercy of so called 'job creators'.

I like State capitalism because its a hybrid and the best of both worlds. It has appeal for capitalists and socialists. It seems a decent happy medium. I like to say China is in stagism mode but I dont really believe it. But their brand of capitalism appeals to me more than the supercapitalsim. I dont want them to change what they are doing because I think they are on the right track and will lead the way.
edit on 16-1-2013 by HenryNorris because: (no reason given)


But yeah, I see privatization as us bending over for corporatists. And also saying that we are stupid. And I think that China does a good job of listening to their people and they do have a form of democracy. I think they are the ones to follow. Not America.
edit on 16-1-2013 by HenryNorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   
After watching this documentary.thenew China looks like a modern day version of Britain during he industrial revolution.

In 1997 China privatised Universities, turning education into a commodity. What has developed is a number of bogus universities who take advantage of the countries rural poor in an effort to deceive them into joining their university. I suggest anyone with a rosy look on Chineses communism to to take a look at this documentary.



In ancient times in China, education was the only way out of poverty -- in recent times it has been the best way. China's economic boom and talk of the merits of hard work have created an expectation that to study is to escape poverty. But these days China's higher education system only leads to jobs for a few, educating a new generation to unemployment and despair



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Kinda like all those second rate colleges in America. And how is that student debt going? Way too many in America have higher education and many are janitors or dont have a job. Many cant pay back student loans.

China is doing their best. Things will continue to improve.

edit- that is from CNN world or BBC world isnt it? I remember seeing an ad for that doco on my phone. Propaganda. No thanks.
edit on 16-1-2013 by HenryNorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   
CPC? Yeah you know me.

edit on 16-1-2013 by HenryNorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


There is already a huge amount of US bashing threads, even if mostly deserved. Power implies increased responsibility and leadership is best done by example. In any case this is anothr situation that I blame the US by the promotion of globalization via the WTO and pushing for the acceptance of China,



Without the mass consumer market of these nations, China would have collapsed at least a decade ago without a serious change in policy. Both domestic and international.


That policy to isolate China was undone after Nixon visited it. It would have gone the same way as the Soviets they wouldn't be able to compete with "Capitalism". In any case they move to support a mixed system was masterful and would even if isolated permit to extend the "Communist" party hold on power. The hope of the US was to get a slower collapse, than that of the Soviets, that before the realization that the cultural colonialism would not work (copyright and patents) nor the centralization of economic markets and services inside the US (freaking Banksters pulled the rug on that) and the fate of the petrodollar may be now at risk due to the US addiction to credit. What the US got was a guaranteed implosion due to their own actions, not only their but the rest of the West (Europe, Japan and Australia have been taking social and economic damage due to this crazy attempt, without much blame, there were lots of warnings, even in the inside the WTO).



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HenryNorris
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
Winston Churchill
Read more at www.brainyquote.com...


This is true. Most people are idiots. Western populations cant be trusted with democracy anyway. We gave it a chance but democracy failed. Its time to move on.


He also said


"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)


edit on 16-1-2013 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Ha! Yeah I agree. We shouldnt be listening to Churchill. Cant believe a word he ever said.

I think there must be something better. Between the Federal Reserve, Congress, Supreme Court, IMF, Ratings Agencies... is it any wonder nothing gets done? What is the real point of voting? Do you really think it matters?



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by HenryNorris
 

Voting matters a great deal and makes quite a difference. It's the pure apathy and numbers who have the attitude that voting is a fool's game which has made it next to worthless. It's not the system that's broken when 50% or so is, on average, the BEST we ever see in this nation for turn out on the biggest elections. Thats 50% of registered voters...which itself is pathetic compared to other nations that don't take their versions of Democracy for granted.

Now sure.....National voting may be a little stupid these days. I just saw some final figures and DOZENS of precincts in Pennsylvania had 99% or 100% Obama voting. 0%.. absolutely ZERO votes for Romney.
this is supposed to be believable? When Communist regimes have offered 100% vote totals, they've been laughed at out of hand for fraud. I find ours no less funny when PA isn't even the only place more voters (By a large margin) voted than voters physically existed...or like the first, it seems no one voted for anyone...anyone at all..except Obama. 100%.


LOCAL and state is what voting is worthwhile for and who the President is makes little difference to your LOCAL tax rates, your sales tax rates and the laws or regulations you live under daily for 90% of what everyone bitches about. Almost ALL of it is state or local in nature. To be honest, voting REALLY MATTERS in the primary and caucus stage. It matters more there than anywhere. Getting people to even bother learning how those WORK, let alone show up to bring change is about a lost cause though.

We didn't lose our system by corruption. We lost it by apathy.....and it's come from people just like that saying 'voting doesn't change anything....so why bother". You bother because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy otherwise.


edit on 16-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by HenryNorris
 





That is propaganda.

America is facing looking like Detroit all over.

China has massive surplus and is about to invest heavily in Europe. China is floating the RMB and demand for it is through the roof as Central Banks look to protect themselves from the doomed USD.

China will grow for at least two decades. This is the start of the Asian Century. Buckle up.


What's propaganda? The fact that China has ghost cities?
How is that propoganda. It's true.

And what kind of surplus? A trade surplus?

China had a massive surplus which has plummeted in the past few years.
www.nytimes.com...


Still, there is reason to think that China’s economic strategy may be turning a corner. While its current-account surplus with the United States, $318 billion last year, was somewhat bigger than it was in 2007, China actually ran a big deficit with the rest of the world. China’s vast takeover of world markets may be running out of steam.


And your assesment that china is growing is runs contrary to fact.
www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by HenryNorris
 


Originally posted by Bixxi3
ok so i recently read all the global trend reports.

dni.gov

Very interesting to read this stuff. Here are some quotes i think are relevant for this thread.



The United States will continue to be identified throughout the world as the leading proponent and beneficiary of globalization. US economic actions, even when pursued for such domestic goals as adjusting interest rates, will have a major global impact because of the tighter integration of global mar- kets by 2015.



Diplomacy will be more complicated. Washington will have greater diffi- culty harnessing its power to achieve specific foreign policy goals: the US Government will exercise a smaller and less powerful part of the overall economic and cultural influence of the United States abroad. • In the absence of a clear and overriding national security threat, the United States will have difficulty drawing on its economic prowess to advance its foreign policy agenda. The top priority of the American pri- vate sector, which will be central to maintaining the US economic and technological lead, will be financial profitability, not foreign policy objec- tives.

Global trends 2015, Published in 2000.



T he world of 2030 will be radically transformed from our world today. By 2030, no country—whether the US, China, or any other large country—will be a hegemonic power. The empowerment of individuals and diffusion of power among states and from states to informal networks will have a dramatic impact, largely reversing the historic rise of the West since 1750, restoring Asia’s weight in the global economy, and ushering in a new era of “democratization” at the international and domestic level.





The diffusion of power among countries will have a dramatic impact by 2030. Asia will have surpassed North America and Europe combined in terms of global power, based upon GDP, population size, military spending, and technological investment. China alone will probably have the largest economy, surpassing that of the United States a few years before 2030. In a tectonic shift, the health of the global economy increasingly will be linked to how well the developing world does—more so than the traditional West. In addition to China, India, and Brazil, regional players such as Colombia, Indonesia, Nigeria, South Africa, and Turkey will become especially important to the global economy. Meanwhile, the economies of Europe, Japan, and Russia are likely to continue their slow relative declines.

the Us, european, and Japanese share of global income is projected to fall from 56 percent
today to well under half by 2030. in 2008, China overtook the Us as the world’s largest saver; by
2020, emerging markets’ share of fnancial assets is projected to almost double.



The current, largely Western dominance of global structures such as the UN Security Council, World Bank, and IMF probably will have been transformed by 2030 to be more in line with the changing hierarchy of new economic players.





The US most likely will remain “frst among equals” among the other great powers in 2030 because of its preeminence across a range of power dimensions and legacies of its leadership role. More important than just its economic weight, the United States’ dominant role in international politics has derived from its preponderance across the board in both hard and soft power. Nevertheless, with the rapid rise of other countries, the “unipolar moment” is over and Pax Americana—the era of American ascendancy in international politics that began in 1945—is fast winding down.



Potential black swans That Would cause The Greatest disruptive Impact.
Chinese “soft” power
could be dramatically boosted, setting off a wave of democratic movements. Alternatively, many
experts believe a democratic China could also become more nationalistic. An economically
collapsed China would trigger political unrest and shock the global economy.
A collapse or sudden retreat of Us power probably would result in an extended period of global
anarchy; no leading power would be likely to replace the United states as guarantor of the
international order

Global Trends 2030, published 2012

something i posted on another thread that i feel might do some good here,
edit on 16-1-2013 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   
You prefer this? Western 'democracy' is at least an improvement on this sort of behaviour.

Chinese labour camp

Perhaps the US government has the same idea?

www.examiner.com...


Ironically, Army Regulation 210-35, which bears the name “Civilian Inmate Labor Program” refers to establishing and managing civilian inmate labor programs on Army installations within the United States. Even more disturbing is the 2010 army manual FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations that was leaked online this year that outlines plans for “political activists” to be "indoctrinated" by “PSYOP officers” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while being detained in prison camps inside the United States. Fort Leonard Wood Public Affairs director Tiffany Wood responded to the leak by saying that the document was not meant to be public and that the manual was for overseas, despite the manual referring to the U.S.
edit on 16-1-2013 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   
You do realise the current China only exists due to the 'bourgeois western democracy' buying their stuff with money they don't have?

Its by no means certain China in its current form is going to survive another 20 years. The expanding middle class puts up with the one party system and the endemic corruption because everybody is getting rich.

When the west crashes and takes the demand away those middles classes (now on the street) might be a bit less sanguine about their governance.

I'll stick with Parliamentary Democracy thanks, seems to have worked well enough the last couple of hundred years.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join