No it's just modern opinions on internet safety as I do not know you. Don't worry, if I have the intellect to participate in this, I think I can count the number of birthdays I've had.-1- wrote:If there were equality in Democratic countries, they would be called socialist countries.
Equal access to healthcare, justice, government services, and women. Each according to his needs.
What we have here is that healthcare is sucking the nation dry, justice gotten is commensurate with how much one can pay for legal advice, government services can be bought fair and proper by lobbying, and good-looking women are got by the likes of Trump, Mick Jagger, and Wilt Chamberlain. By the truckloads. If you are an ordinary sort of guy, then tell me, I demand of you: when was the last time that two-hundred-strong naked runway model women were banging on your hotel room door to let them in for the purpose of getting deflowered? Huh? Huh? You see, in a socialist country that is an everyday norm. (This is a response directly directed at the Original Poster.)
-- Updated 2017 March 8th, 6:24 pm to add the following --
"If you are asked how young you are, they are too old for you."TigerNinja wrote:
I'm too young to say my age if that counts. And I am under 18. That's all I am going to say .
-- Updated 2017 March 8th, 6:35 pm to add the following --
I don't... quite get this. There is now an age limit that allows you or disallows you from stating it?TigerNinja wrote: I'm too young to say my age if that counts. And I am under 18. That's all I am going to say .
Or else... are you referring to the public sector education system, which now is so bad, that younger people are incapable of knowing their age in numerical terms? Like, I mean, you know, before a certain graduating year, people were taught numbers above 5, but after a certain graduating year, they were not taught numbers larger than five, because "You can carry your fingers everywhere, much like your calculator."
Or maybe the reasoning by the school board trustees goes, as collected from the above quote, "age counts, so you kids don't have to."
I, for one, bow to your wherewithal to take all this sh... from us old fogies without any damage to your ego (I could not do the same in the reverse situation...) I don't think you are slow but actually bright. If you are inexperienced, well, you got your excuse, but we don't for laughing at you for it.
Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
- TigerNinja
- Posts: 92
- Joined: July 23rd, 2016, 3:59 am
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
- Ranvier
- Posts: 772
- Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
- Location: USA
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
- Rr6
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Humans metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts attempt to apply a democracy and equality.
Simple not complex. imho
r6
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Plus in this case a lot of money would be saved opposed to present voting procedures, by asking only one of the constituents to vote. (Since they are all on the same page as far as judging ability and capability is concerned.)Belindi wrote:For the purposes of democracy it's best if all who otherwise can vote are also equal in good judgement.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7996
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Well, you get what you pay for (your central theme). If you live where the powerful and connected can avoid paying taxes, the available tax base is artificially small, tax revenues are small and guess what? The services are poor to inadequate. What is difficult to understand about that? In Scandinavia the services are much better. Are you surprised?Ranvier wrote:Lol, there is no such thing as "free" anything in this insane world, nor there is such a thing as "free democracy" or "equality". These are just words that have no real meaning other than to propagate an illusion of reality. The history suggests that anything delegated to the government will be sub par. Education, health care, law enforcement or anything one can think of could be much better if people have direct control of such services. For instance, I constantly read that people are dumb and are ill equipped to make educated and well reasoned choices in voting. Yet people want a public education system that results in such negligence in promoting "dumb" students to adulthood with a public high school diploma. Similarly with healthcare, if one wants a place to extract teeth for "free" after paying taxes, then public healthcare is the way to go. However, if someone wants a little more, then one has to pay for it with cash. Same is true for law enforcement. If one hires a private security firm for protection, then one can expect results or they don't get paid. But with the police department, one can be involved in a car accident and wait for three hours for the cops to show up. Socialist Democracy doesn't seem to work all that well. So yes, inequality will always be the reality.
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Discussing ideal political systems is dangerous because it presupposes all the conditions of a nation to support such a system. Inequality does exist in government and society in various ways. I am not prepared to argue about its validity or morality, however I can posit both advantages and disadvantages of inequality.
intended only as an observation- Having worked in the political sphere I've yet to encounter an Industry or area of knowledge more ethically reprehensible. Its a terrible feeling to study political science as it is taught (my experience) at university. I did my MA in political theory and most of the universities I researched only offer 3-4 areas of study. After 2 years I quit my job and entered a different industry, I suspect most people who value critical thought and ethical obligation would be quite distraught.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
By what measurement and standard?
According to whose calculation?
Obviously, there is no such thing as absolute equality of persons in all areas of life, but you can certainly attempt equality of political power among a citizenry.
As far as democracy itself goes, each country has to define what it means by that term - it's a very broad one, with a mixed history.
This is usually done in a constitution.
They have to choose a system of governance that will work in their cultural tradition, and decide by what set of principles it operates.
Once all of that is set out clearly, you can tell whether the practices are followed properly or corrupted.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
A man and a woman are unequal because she can be incommoded by childbirth or nursing a baby.
In 19th century England a titled man or woman had ascribed status and all the achievement of a servant was very unlikely to make the servant equal to his master.
What's the difference between ascribed status and achieved status?
A blind man and a sighted man are unequal.
A patient and her doctor are usually unequal in their relative medical expertise.
A teacher and his pupil are unequal in maturity and ability to independently navigate their lives.
A poor man's son and a rich man's son are unequal because the rich man can afford a better school for his son.
A rich man's daughter is unequal to a poor man's daughter because the former can buy a lot of designer clothes. The poor man's daughter might have more incentive to learn to improve her chances.
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
On a general note, what is the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome , and which of those do you support? Or do you perhaps support insurmountable inequality?
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Interesting question Belindi. I contend that (individuals are not equal) equality of opportunity is necessary (ideally) in a democratic system. Democracy demands equal political franchise. Equality of opportunity at the institutional level allows for individuals to pursue a particular interest, education, employment etc. The individual is allowed to express itself however the success ought to be dependent on the extent of the individuals abilities and attributes. This secures that individuals better suited for the task ( Superior in a particular role) will be given the roles determined by competition. Those better suited for the task also strengthen the nation as a whole, indirectly helping all members of society by advancing society through that particular role. Equality of outcome is irrational and dangerous to all members of a particular society because it may alienate the individuals who excel at the particular role. Dangerous to the nation as a whole and its particular members because it reduces the overall success of the role given. I want the best doctor, the best educator, the best political leaders, the best individual (in regards to the role/thing/opportunity) available determined by there individual success.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Equality of outcome is too vague and subjective to be considered without laying out some terms of reference.On a general note, what is the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome , and which of those do you support? Or do you perhaps support insurmountable inequality?
Equality of opportunity is espoused **in theory** by all democracies, but rarely achieved in practice. It is extremely difficult to achieve in a system that permits wealth and power to be accumulated and inherited. The only way such a system could even begin to approach an attempt at equal opportunity is to provide universal health, hygiene, nutrition and education to all of the children, have a steeply graduated income tax and stringent regulations on hiring and business practices. IOW, a very robust, socialist governance.
Inequality of opportunity in economics and status doesn't necessarily preclude equality in political power, if the election process is relatively free of corruption. However, such a democracy will inevitably develop a robust socialist government. That is, if all votes count and all citizens are able to exercise their vote, and people generally vote for their own self-interest, then the government will always represent the majority of people, and enact legislation to serve the majority of people.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Do you think that referendums tend towards inequality of opportunity? What I have in mind is fear of incomers and perceived outsiders, related to real fears and justified resentments among a large and significant part of the electorate. The recent British referendum had a very narrow majority who supported quiting the European Union. The Remainers were thus treated unequally.Inequality of opportunity in economics and status doesn't necessarily preclude equality in political power, if the election process is relatively free of corruption. However, such a democracy will inevitably develop a robust socialist government. That is, if all votes count and all citizens are able to exercise their vote, and people generally vote for their own self-interest, then the government will always represent the majority of people, and enact legislation to serve the majority of people.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Referenda are tricky - they don't need to be, but usually are. The outcome depends on several factors that are too easy to manipulate and suborn.Belindi wrote: Do you think that referendums tend towards inequality of opportunity?
F1: information on the subject - its accessibility and accuracy.
This depends on public information media: who controls it, who feeds in the data, what aspects of the matter are covered, when, how; who monitors the content for slant and hype.
F2: Previous attitudes and assumptions that affect the subject.
How much propaganda, scapegoating and scaremongering preceded the referendum, and by what time frame? Does such propaganda, perchance or per design, benefit certain interest groups who are, incidentally or purposefully, influential in broadcasting? Was there any serious attempt to counteract this propaganda?
F3: How well the voters understand what choice they are being asked to make is at stake.
Before the referendum, were the pros and cons - the likely long-term outcomes of Yea and Nay - objectively laid out for public scrutiny, long enough to reflect and ponder?
F4: The actual question.
How was the question phrased? Who drafted it? How clear is it to a poorly-educated voter?
Bottom line: a referendum is only useful if the people actually know what they're voting on.
I would have to wonder who gains huge amounts of money and/or power from relating fear and resentment to specific target populations.What I have in mind is fear of incomers and perceived outsiders, related to real fears and justified resentments among a large and significant part of the electorate.
When you consider the history of anti-semitism in Europe, you see the pattern: disallow Christians from speculative investment; borrow lots of money from Jewish bankers, then outlaw Jews so as not to repay them; then spread some nasty rumours about their treachery and usury - how they're responsible for all the hardship (actually caused by the nobility's irresponsible wars) and then maybe throw in some accusation of child sacrifice to stir up the mobs.
And very badly served. But what do you expect from a corrupt system? Equality of both opportunity and political voice were absent already.The recent British referendum had a very narrow majority who supported quiting the European Union. The Remainers were thus treated unequally.
Things really looked quite hopeful between 1950 and 1980 - The empire struck back.
Pity.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
Equality of opportunity in education cannot be unless the poorer sort of people are housed, properly fed, and given adequate health care. For instance, a child cannot do his homework properly in an overcrowded uncomfortable house, or if he is poorly fed , or not supplied with sufficient opportunities for exercise and rest. Enrichments can be bought with increased taxation and well funded local authorities.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Can Inequality In A Democracy Be Good?
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023