Thaksin Says Sister May Not Become PM Even If Pheu Thai Wins

[OzMick]

The member of the Parliament decide and the head of state endorses a new PM.

For the pedantic:

<snipped wiki quote>

Meanwhile the people will not make the direct decision who become the PM they still have a big influence on the final outcome with electing the members of the House of Representatives.

Meanwhile Thaksin will not make the direct decision who becomes the PM he still can influence the final outcome with suggesting who should be the PTP nominee for the office.

The people know that and have now the choice to vote for PTP or someone else.

You would be surprised how many red shirt supporters DON'T know that.

How often do you see "Abhisit shouldn't be PM because he wasn't elected by the people"?

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

[Rhys]

This is just too funny and shamefull.. :jap:

Edited May 24, 2011 by Rhys

[samurai]

You would be surprised how many red shirt supporters DON'T know that.

How often do you see "Abhisit shouldn't be PM because he wasn't elected by the people"?

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

It is its strength.

[OzMick]

family row in the Shinawatra clan? Afraid the little sister would vanish with too much of the assets still to be stolen?

What a farce... disgusting Shinawatra's...

Democrats have been falling for Thaksin's tactics for a while now, and it seems that many foreigners are falling for them too. Sadly not many foreigners here know enough about politics. They think they do, but they don't. Just because Thaksin says that his sister may not become PM, doesn't mean that his sister won't become PM.

If you're swimming in a shark tank, it's a wise idea to throw blood into the other end of the pool, rather than where you're swimming, just to keep the sharks off your back until you're out of the pool. Sharks may just be dumb enough to believe it. And apparently even some of the people just watching the sharks from outside the tank.

Some of us know enough to realise that a convicted/escaped felon shouldn't be making the decisions of one of the major parties. Perhaps that's how they do thing where you come from;

are you Russian perchance?

Where you come from?

Maybe you can hold a nude peace protest, hug a tree or wear an anorak and grow a beard if that helps in your better world.

But this is Thailand calling it Russia will not stop Thaksin. Why not accept reality?

I come from godzone, as most can pick from the moniker. I have attended several protests, while wearing a uniform and keeping the great unwashed in order - nudity was not the uniform of the day.

If you re-read the post, slowly, word by word, you may well realise that in no sense was I comparing or contrasting thailand with Russia. In fact, I mistook the persons name as being russian sounding, a place where possibly it is reasonable for convicted felons to choose the next PM.

[jdinasia]

This makes a mockery of the Thai Politics

If Yingluck gets in her brother will still pull the strings.

It will be Thaksin all over again.

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats go.

Now Thaksin has shown his true hand in this political debate.

Hope people vote sensibly not for Thaksin's party the Pheu Thai.

He is hoping to get a pardon if the Pheu Thai win.

A pardon? For the victory?

Amnesty and pardon are two different things. Thaksin is not eligible for a pardon. (They tried that and failed.) The only real plank in the PTP platform is an amnesty for Thaksin. I am not sure that this can be accomplished via a simple change in the law. Yet again it will require exactly what had the PAD on the streets for in 2008 .. to block any changes in the constitution designed to help one man.

[hanuman1]

The member of the Parliament decide and the head of state endorses a new PM.

For the pedantic:

<snipped wiki quote>

Meanwhile the people will not make the direct decision who become the PM they still have a big influence on the final outcome with electing the members of the House of Representatives.

Meanwhile Thaksin will not make the direct decision who becomes the PM he still can influence the final outcome with suggesting who should be the PTP nominee for the office.

The people know that and have now the choice to vote for PTP or someone else.

You would be surprised how many red shirt supporters DON'T know that.

How often do you see "Abhisit shouldn't be PM because he wasn't elected by the people"?

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

:lol: Thanks for that - you a funny guy!!!!!

[jdinasia]

It is its strength.

It obviously isn't a strength of democracy in Thailand, that regional political machines control the electorate through both bribes and intimidation and extortion. (If your village fails to get a 60% majority for our group you will be replaced as village headman AND NOTHING will be spent in your village in the next government term, oh .. and this week's lottery winners will be 13, 7 6 and 5 (the candidate numbers for the local party) everyone playing those numbers will win 200 baht.

Worse yet in a democracy is when you have something like the 2005 TRT victory coupled with a leader that fancies himself above reproach. Buy up the regional power players --- gain absolute control of parliament beyond the ability of the opposition to censure ---- then rob the country blind. All under the guise of democracy whilst tearing down the checks and balances needed for a democracy to function.

PTP front-runners only have 10 more days to make any change in party affiliation, after that they MUST stay with PTP or not run for office in the upcoming elections ....

The next week will be interesting ....

[samurai]

Some of us know enough to realise that a convicted/escaped felon shouldn't be making the decisions of one of the major parties. Perhaps that's how they do thing where you come from;

are you Russian perchance?

Where you come from?

Maybe you can hold a nude peace protest, hug a tree or wear an anorak and grow a beard if that helps in your better world.

But this is Thailand calling it Russia will not stop Thaksin. Why not accept reality?

I come from godzone, as most can pick from the moniker. I have attended several protests, while wearing a uniform and keeping the great unwashed in order - nudity was not the uniform of the day.

If you re-read the post, slowly, word by word, you may well realise that in no sense was I comparing or contrasting thailand with Russia. In fact, I mistook the persons name as being russian sounding, a place where possibly it is reasonable for convicted felons to choose the next PM.

If you start to think you should realise that it doesn't matter from where someone is coming.

And there is Thaksin does what Thaksin does. Albeit in exile, but still somehow Thailand. If you post your CV here will not stop him nor does it anything of that what you think how it in Russia might be.

For a man in uniform maybe to difficult to understand.

But keep ranting about that convicted/escaped felon. Guess it is that what you do since 3 and more years. maybe one day it will help.

[OzMick]

You would be surprised how many red shirt supporters DON'T know that.

How often do you see "Abhisit shouldn't be PM because he wasn't elected by the people"?

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

It is its strength.

Tripe! Allowing the stupid, the ignorant and the ill-informed equal voting rights leads to politicians putting forward populist policies which are often to the detriment of the country as a whole.

If you ever manage to spend one day in a prison you will find hundreds of people who fit into all 3 categories. In Australia and many US states, long term prisoners (Aus) and felons (US) lose their voting rights. Yet on any democratic index, these 2 countries are among the highest ranked.

Democracy is not a perfect form of govt, only the best found so far.

[samurai]

This makes a mockery of the Thai Politics

If Yingluck gets in her brother will still pull the strings.

It will be Thaksin all over again.

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats go.

Now Thaksin has shown his true hand in this political debate.

Hope people vote sensibly not for Thaksin's party the Pheu Thai.

He is hoping to get a pardon if the Pheu Thai win.

A pardon? For the victory?

Amnesty and pardon are two different things. Thaksin is not eligible for a pardon.

I know that. I am not one of these uneducated ...

[Pi Sek]

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

:lol: Thanks for that - you a funny guy!!!!!

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

[whybother]

Yes it is definitely incorrect

Following are excerpts from his interview given to Matichon:

Yingluck is Pheu Thai's No-1 party-list candidate. So, you have decided to make her the next prime minister?

I am thinking about it. The prime minister does not need to be No-1 party-list candidate. I am thinking about it back and forth. First of all, Thai politicians are bent on destroying rivals. Anyone who becomes the government leader will be destroyed. Both true and untrue stories will be cited to try to destroy the government leader. So, I feel sorry for my sister and she is a woman. She is good at administration and she sued to run AIS and run a firm with Bt200 billion worth of assets. But running a firm is different from running a government.

I believe when she becomes the prime minister, she will definitely be destroyed by the Democrat. So, I am worried whether she will be able to tolerate it. … I am confident she can be a very capable prime minister because she has more administration experience more than Abhisit [Vejjajiva, the Democrat leader].

This part of the news post does clearly indicate that the interview was made AFTER he appointed her as No-1 candidate of PTP,which according to other sources was not at the time of the interview.

Please let me know if you need some more clarifications.

It's incorrect according to what Thaksin tweeted. Maybe the article is correct and Thaksin's lying.

Even then, the Nation is quoting a Matichon article. Go and have a word to to the Nation reporters about fact checking.

[jdinasia]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

False?

[metisdead]

Some inflammatory posts and replies have been removed. It is perfectly acceptable to report on events and give opinions, it is not acceptable to post in an inflammatory manner. Posters are reminded to stay on topic and to refrain from comments concerning the character of other posters.

[samurai]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

False?

yes.

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

often misquoted as "democracy is not my goal "

And don't forget, its just a translation and its a news article by the Nation.

Edited May 24, 2011 by samurai

[hanuman1]

So they are dumb people. What you suggest. Catch and neuter them and strip of their voting rights?

It IS one of the weaknesses of democracy that the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science. PAD attempted to address the issue at one stage, but it was rightly seen as elitist, and, I believe, quietly dropped.

BE CLEAR - I do not hold or put forward any views on the issue, only recognise it as a weakness.

:lol: Thanks for that - you a funny guy!!!!!

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

But neither you nor OzMick nor anyone else who believes that can either justify it or suggest a better solution without introducing more subjective judgements on your part. Their can be no basis for your argument based on objective truths. The idea of 'every man/woman being equal' is for some a religious tenet, for others a social or humanist concept and for others a cornerstone of Democracy.

Nietzche may have been right about there being a natural hierarchy of things, including within the human race, but this viewpoint is not the prevailing global (or dare I say it 'human') modus operandi. One only has to to see how easily Nietzche's ideas have been twisted in the past, resulting in fascism and massive hardship, to understand that the suggestion of one man's opinion (or vote) being worth more than another's is a recipe for disaster and more akin to the law of the jungle than that of a sentient, intelligent race.

It is because of - not despite - human intelligence that everyone's votes count the same.

[rubl]

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

False?

yes.

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

often misquoted as "democracy is not my goal "

And don't forget, its just a translation and its a news article by the Nation.

More over the article has not been approved by our esteemed member 'samurai'. Now that really makes it suspect I guess

[samurai]

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

False?

yes.

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

often misquoted as "democracy is not my goal "

And don't forget, its just a translation and its a news article by the Nation.

More over the article has not been approved by our esteemed member 'samurai'. Now that really makes it suspect I guess

I am the democracy guy here and would even let the stupid and uninformed vote.

but some seems to fancy the "democracy is not my goal" approach (don't ask for a source of the quote, just take it like it is)

[Pi Sek]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

But neither you nor OzMick nor anyone else who believes that can either justify it or suggest a better solution without introducing more subjective judgements on your part. Their can be no basis for your argument based on objective truths. The idea of 'every man/woman being equal' is for some a religious tenet, for others a social or humanist concept and for others a cornerstone of Democracy.

Nietzche may have been right about there being a natural hierarchy of things, including within the human race, but this viewpoint is not the prevailing global (or dare I say it 'human') modus operandi. One only has to to see how easily Nietzche's ideas have been twisted in the past, resulting in fascism and massive hardship, to understand that the suggestion of one man's opinion (or vote) being worth more than another's is a recipe for disaster and more akin to the law of the jungle than that of a sentient, intelligent race.

It is because of - not despite - human intelligence that everyone's votes count the same.

I think both OzMick and I stated that we saw faults within the process of democracy, rather than condemning it as a system which does not work. It has the capacity to work, but it has not worked 100% anywhere in the world, at any point in history.

Indeed Nietzche may have been right, but he is also the philosopher upon whose Hitler's ideas were principally founded - this supports your points against mine, as the subjective view of one man (or group of men) shaped the policies of a nation. It just so happened that this man was a very skilled demagogue whose subjective views were extremist to say the least, and extremism has no place in a working democracy. The "natural hierarchy of things" is indeed not the prevailing global - and human - modus operandi. So it seems we are in agreement, whilst disagreeing!

My only problem with this is that education seems to take too long, because there are lots and lots of factors obscuring the education. There are complications involved between changing an idea and changing a belief - that's one "factor". Another factor is whether the education is accurate, or even subject to bias (as with every history book in existence). Another factor is access to education. I'm sure there are many more factors. Of course, the ongoing evolution of democracy should mean these factors are not significant. But, unfortunately, they are - all over the world.

A very appropriate last line - you are right. However, intelligence (the ability to understand), knowledge (what you have understood) and wisdom (the application of what you have understand) are not the same thing - and I'd argue that knowledge is of more significance than intelligence when casting a vote, with wisdom having strong input.

[Pi Sek]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

<snip>

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

False?

<snipped link to typical The Nation headline misquoting a politician>

yes.

<snipped explanation of how The Nation misquoted the politician>

Nonetheless, I still think it was a little out of line to attribute that quote to me or the person before me (OzMick?)... when it wasn't quoted. That is naughty and so, by my reckoning, you owe me an apology.

[OzMick]

But neither you nor OzMick nor anyone else who believes that can either justify it or suggest a better solution without introducing more subjective judgements on your part. Their can be no basis for your argument based on objective truths. The idea of 'every man/woman being equal' is for some a religious tenet, for others a social or humanist concept and for others a cornerstone of Democracy.

Nietzche may have been right about there being a natural hierarchy of things, including within the human race, but this viewpoint is not the prevailing global (or dare I say it 'human') modus operandi. One only has to to see how easily Nietzche's ideas have been twisted in the past, resulting in fascism and massive hardship, to understand that the suggestion of one man's opinion (or vote) being worth more than another's is a recipe for disaster and more akin to the law of the jungle than that of a sentient, intelligent race.

It is because of - not despite - human intelligence that everyone's votes count the same.

But it is done, in a small way. In an earlier reply, I mentioned that prisoners lose their voting rights in some cases in both the US and Aus, and in both cases the overwhelming majority of prison populations are mentally ill, uneducated and/or ignorant. whether this is seen as punishment or lifting the IQ of the electorate, I will leave to conjecture.

In the world of SF, it is often depicted that a minimum education standard (with free universal education) would entitle every citizen to vote on every decision, cutting out the need for MPs and elections.

[rubl]

yes.

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

often misquoted as "democracy is not my goal "

And don't forget, its just a translation and its a news article by the Nation.

More over the article has not been approved by our esteemed member 'samurai'. Now that really makes it suspect I guess

I am the democracy guy here and would even let the stupid and uninformed vote.

but some seems to fancy the "democracy is not my goal" approach (don't ask for a source of the quote, just take it like it is)

True, true, some seem to take the 'democracy is not my goal approach', k. Thaksin amongst others. Somehow also you by trying to diminish the value of an article you don't like. IMHO of course

[hanuman1]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

Having said that, as for the "political science" professors, I have seen examples where such types apply to much theory to practice without taking factors such as human nature into account and they end up trying to promote unrealistic dreams of a utopia without greed, desire or even necessity. And, in Thailand, the content of such political education is sometimes "doctored" - meaning that the educators sometimes are working off false information. The long-term effects of this can be easily seen just by looking at the local hybrid dialect "Tinglish".

But neither you nor OzMick nor anyone else who believes that can either justify it or suggest a better solution without introducing more subjective judgements on your part. Their can be no basis for your argument based on objective truths. The idea of 'every man/woman being equal' is for some a religious tenet, for others a social or humanist concept and for others a cornerstone of Democracy.

Nietzche may have been right about there being a natural hierarchy of things, including within the human race, but this viewpoint is not the prevailing global (or dare I say it 'human') modus operandi. One only has to to see how easily Nietzche's ideas have been twisted in the past, resulting in fascism and massive hardship, to understand that the suggestion of one man's opinion (or vote) being worth more than another's is a recipe for disaster and more akin to the law of the jungle than that of a sentient, intelligent race.

It is because of - not despite - human intelligence that everyone's votes count the same.

I think both OzMick and I stated that we saw faults within the process of democracy, rather than condemning it as a system which does not work. It has the capacity to work, but it has not worked 100% anywhere in the world, at any point in history.

Indeed Nietzche may have been right, but he is also the philosopher upon whose Hitler's ideas were principally founded - this supports your points against mine, as the subjective view of one man (or group of men) shaped the policies of a nation. It just so happened that this man was a very skilled demagogue whose subjective views were extremist to say the least, and extremism has no place in a working democracy. The "natural hierarchy of things" is indeed not the prevailing global - and human - modus operandi. So it seems we are in agreement, whilst disagreeing!

My only problem with this is that education seems to take too long, because there are lots and lots of factors obscuring the education. There are complications involved between changing an idea and changing a belief - that's one "factor". Another factor is whether the education is accurate, or even subject to bias (as with every history book in existence). Another factor is access to education. I'm sure there are many more factors. Of course, the ongoing evolution of democracy should mean these factors are not significant. But, unfortunately, they are - all over the world.

A very appropriate last line - you are right. However, intelligence (the ability to understand), knowledge (what you have understood) and wisdom (the application of what you have understand) are not the same thing - and I'd argue that knowledge is of more significance than intelligence when casting a vote, with wisdom having strong input.

I don't disagree with anything you say.

Your arguments underline the reason why two people who know the same facts (lets say for the sake of argument that those facts are demonstrably true and self evident), but still their meaning would be different for each person. In other words, each person's own life experience and mental processes will result in a different viewpoint based on those facts.

Given that this is as basic a human trait as anything can be, and bringing this discussion back to the voting process in this country's current political climate, I can't see how the votes of people who you or others consider uninformed, misguided or even ignorant can be considered any less valid than those of people who consider the opposite.

After all, if voting is designed to show the state of people's thinking then it is required to show the good the bad and the ugly.

[samurai]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

<snip>

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

Nonetheless, I still think it was a little out of line to attribute that quote to me or the person before me (OzMick?)... when it wasn't quoted. That is naughty and so, by my reckoning, you owe me an apology.

huh? Apology? For what? For suggesting that democracy is not your goal?

What has Plato's concept of the philosopher kings to do with democracy?

Don't you know what you talking about when you come up with arguments like "absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision" and complains like "the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science."

Read more in Plato's Politeia. Maybe you like it. But a democrat was he not.

Furthermore I just said that I am waiting for a third person to come up with that quote as it usually happens when there some political scientists of TVF talk about democracy and Nietzche [sic].

And as assumed it took just the timespan of sipping a coffee till the one-line rhetorician showed up. so that comment was actually more for them than for you.

[hanuman1]

But neither you nor OzMick nor anyone else who believes that can either justify it or suggest a better solution without introducing more subjective judgements on your part. Their can be no basis for your argument based on objective truths. The idea of 'every man/woman being equal' is for some a religious tenet, for others a social or humanist concept and for others a cornerstone of Democracy.

Nietzche may have been right about there being a natural hierarchy of things, including within the human race, but this viewpoint is not the prevailing global (or dare I say it 'human') modus operandi. One only has to to see how easily Nietzche's ideas have been twisted in the past, resulting in fascism and massive hardship, to understand that the suggestion of one man's opinion (or vote) being worth more than another's is a recipe for disaster and more akin to the law of the jungle than that of a sentient, intelligent race.

It is because of - not despite - human intelligence that everyone's votes count the same.

But it is done, in a small way. In an earlier reply, I mentioned that prisoners lose their voting rights in some cases in both the US and Aus, and in both cases the overwhelming majority of prison populations are mentally ill, uneducated and/or ignorant. whether this is seen as punishment or lifting the IQ of the electorate, I will leave to conjecture.

In the world of SF, it is often depicted that a minimum education standard (with free universal education) would entitle every citizen to vote on every decision, cutting out the need for MPs and elections.

Leaving aside the moral legal arguments about whether or not mentally ill people - in jail or not - should get the vote, I believe that not allowing prisoners to vote is part of their punishment. It is a removal of their right, like the right to freedom. I therefore think that voting is a right, not a privilege for all those who are legally allowed to do it.

In any case the removal of this right for prisoners is not an indication of their mental or intellectual 'fitness' for making a voting decision.

[samurai]

I am the democracy guy here and would even let the stupid and uninformed vote.

but some seems to fancy the "democracy is not my goal" approach (don't ask for a source of the quote, just take it like it is)

True, true, some seem to take the 'democracy is not my goal approach', k. Thaksin amongst others. Somehow also you by trying to diminish the value of an article you don't like. IMHO of course

Okay Thaksins goal is " to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress." if that is so essential for you you should it put in your signature.

[rubl]

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

begin removed ...

And as assumed it took just the timespan of sipping a coffee till the one-line rhetorician showed up. so that comment was actually more for them than for you.

And here I was thinking you were trying to be the one-line rhetorician drinking coffee

[Pi Sek]

Actually I concur entirely with OzMick. Democracy may be the best system for everyone for the timebeing, but it is absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision. "I don't like the candidate, I don't like the policies, but I'm gonna vote Republican because I'm a Texas man", etc - unbelievable.

<snip>

waiting now for the third stooge expert that comes with that false "democracy is not my goal " quote.

Nonetheless, I still think it was a little out of line to attribute that quote to me or the person before me (OzMick?)... when it wasn't quoted. That is naughty and so, by my reckoning, you owe me an apology.

huh? Apology? For what? For suggesting that democracy is not your goal?

What has Plato's concept of the philosopher kings to do with democracy?

Don't you know what you talking about when you come up with arguments like "absolutely flawed because of just that - an uninformed decision has as much weight as an informed decision" and complains like "the village idiot gets the same voting rights as a professor of political science."

Read more in Plato's Politeia. Maybe you like it. But a democrat was he not.

Furthermore I just said that I am waiting for a third person to come up with that quote as it usually happens when there some political scientists of TVF talk about democracy and Nietzche [sic].

And as assumed it took just the timespan of sipping a coffee till the one-line rhetorician showed up. so that comment was actually more for them than for you.

If you still don't know why I - and the mods before me - pulled you up on your manners, there isn't much help I can offer. In reply to my given personal stance on the flaws of democracy, you were waiting for the "third stooge expert" to come up with a given false quote. This suggests that I, and one before me, made a quote which was not made. As I said above, that was naughty and, if I'd have done it, I would have apologised in retrospect as soon as I realised I had made a mistake. I would not have done so intentionally - I am above that.

I don't know what your academic history is, but I have a BA in Classics (not Classical Studies but Classics, as in studying original Greek and Roman texts and art and providing commentary) from a pretty good university, so I don't know if pulling me up on Plato is the best idea. Besides that, it has no relevance to the discussion!

[rubl]

Okay Thaksins goal is " to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress." if that is so essential for you you should it put in your signature.

Whatever k. Thaksin's goal may be, I have never said nor indicated that his goals are essential to me. Your conclusion is faulty. Maybe you should put up a signature. I wouldn't presume to suggest what you should put there though

Edited May 24, 2011 by rubl

[PoorSucker]

Okay Thaksins goal is " to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress." if that is so essential for you you should it put in your signature.

Give everyone credit cards and "everyone will be rich in 6 months"