Democracy just doesn't work anymore (A tale of two political systems)

Great video makes one think : http://www.ted.com/talks/eric_x_li_a_tale_of_two_political_systems.html

 

I do not have to watch the video to know it is crap.

 

a bit smug

 

Interesting ideas, though the point seems to be "China is doing great and let's get rid of the idea a single ideal political system", not "democracy just doesn't work anymore". One could argue that democracy is failing, but that doesn't seem to be the point of the video.

I partially buy Li's argument, but there's much to criticize. For one, he supports his position with public opinion polls. You can be arrested or executed for criticizing the government in China, and the Chinese are fed state propaganda, so it's not a surprise if opinion polls strongly favor the government.

Li admits that China has big problems with pollution and corruption. He does not, however, address human rights abuses both within and outside of China. China is one of the most ruthless countries in the world with regard to human rights; Darfur and Tibet being two prominent examples. There is also the fact that China executes more of its own people, and more political dissidents, than any other country in the world.

 

See I see it as tit for tat with regards to being fed state propoganda and human rights abuses. Here in the UK we're fed just as must state propoganda and you only have to spend some time volunteering at a women's crisis center to see at least one type of opression within our own nation. And I'll ask you, does anyone really want to scrutinize what the *Empire* has done outside of its own borders? I'm certain the Irish, Hindus, Native Americans, South Africans, etc. would have a lot to say about British human rights abuses.

The fact is that democracy is failing in our world. It's failing because of arrogance and because of being consumed by the free market dichotomy. In the next 10 years what's going to be called a "free nation" is going to be a surveillance state with drastically increased police powers and with unfettered access to a citizen's private life. Furthermore the average individual will be a rather dumb ninny that lives only to consume and fill corporate coffers. (Huxley's Brave New World is upon us all)

 

It is failing because people are waking up and seeing egalitarianism as the lie that it is. We've been told that all men/women, all cultures, on this earth are equal. That simply isn't true and, as such, people are loosing their faith in the flawed system that is democracy.

 

Time to move to Yemen then

 

We're not equal? What do you mean with that, sig? Democracy caused us at least to be more equal it seems.

 

Some people are treated as being more "Equal" than others...

 

How we are treated in practice/real life may be different than which rights we all have.

 

I mean we are not all equal in terms of ability, intelligence, education, etc.... Why, then, should be treated the same when it comes to our political voice? Why should someone who has little to no education, pays no taxes, doesn't own property and so on have a political voice equal to that of someone who has?

 

The Constitution, Sig. "All men are created equal..."

(I do get your point, but, there is that^^^)


oh and there is also this...
who is gonna go around determining people's worth.
"Well, Person A has 6 years college done. Person B has 4. Person C has a 2 yr degree and Person D is one credit short of a two year degree but their i.q. is 20 points higher than person B. But Btw, Person B and C volunteer while only person A and D take take of kids... blah blah blah"

Who's gonna assign value?

 

Democracy is the best we've come up with so far. It ain't perfect,its a 'work in progress'. But even given the increasing complexities of life & diversity within societies I'd say that we have better responsive democratic governance than say 100 years ago. It ain't easy,its bloody frustrating at times,ect, but its worth working at.

Any better ideas ?

 

We are not equal in our abilities and intelligence etc. but that does not mean of course we aren't equal in rights and law. As you said in another thread it is hard to determine where someone's right to vote for example should be extracted. I certainly am convinced it should not depend on things as the amount of property (or lack thereof), or the amount of education one succesfully finished!

 

So ,am I right in assuming you believe in a meritocracy ? If so at what point of social achievement would you set the bar,for those whom can and cannot vote?

 

You do know that there is absolutely no where in the world any kind of constitution or similar that say's *all HUMANS are created equal.*

 

That isn't in the Constitution, AT....

Regardless, in terms of protection under the law (ie in terms of life, property, etc...), I believe every man should be equal. That said, when it comes to having a political voice, I am not so sure. The Constitution, while noble, is not without it's flaws.

I never said it should come down simply to one's education level. There is sure to be plenty of grey, regardless.

 

I do to a large extent, yes. I have a few ideas where the bar could be set but I worry we are starting to pull this thread off topic.

 

Declaration of Independence I mean...

In any case, I'm saying who is going to determine all the factors of a person to determine their worth? It would be too complicated and who is to say what is more important than something else?

 

Well, the guys who wrote the Constitution seemed to be able to figure out some criteria. They never meant for voting rights to be universal. Seeing as the elimination of universal suffrage would require, basically, an entirely new constitution I'd imagine the framers of this hypothetical document would be the ones making that determination.