Yet another damn terrorist attack

[Dauphin]

I am curious as to why a parliament led country is not a democracy.

[Elok]

The Nazis substantially liberalized gun control (for everyone except Jews). And much of the Muslim world has about half a Kalashnikov per capita; it hasn't made them freer.

Re: the U.S., blasphemy is actually rather passe. South Park and Family Guy have been doing it on TV for more than a decade; it's been normal in music since Madonna paved the way back in the eighties. Religious characters rarely appear, in any medium, except as stock villains (or in the backgrounds of wedding/funeral episodes). Oddly, we still act like it's something daring and original.

[C0ckney]

When did the UK become a democracy. Just curious as to your definition.

surely after 1801 as there was no UK before then.

[Imran Siddiqui]

1801 then!

[Jon Miller]

IMO the US's biggest restriction on freedom of speech is campaign finance laws, which I think ought to be considered unconstitutional, but yes the US is at least an order of magnitude more liberal on speech freedom than any other country. And that's why I'll always roll my eyes when someone comes out with a report saying our press is somehow less free than say Sweden's.

There is a natural limit on speech where 'the speech' is made not for me to hear your ideas but for you to 'block' the speech of others. Basically, the intention of your speech is to make it so I can not hear others speech and not so that I can hear you.

In the US, for the rich (which includes more than just rich individuals), it is far past the point where the increases in 'speech' are made to drone out and block the speech of others rather than to inform/alert/express their own ideas.

Studies have shown that the money spent (at the high levels it is) doesn't serve to inform people, but the studies don't address why the money is still spent/etc. It is to make it so that that is all that is heard, rather than other's speech or even the audiences own mind.

JM

[Dauphin]

surely after 1801 as there was no UK before then.

The kingdoms were united in 160-something. James 1 and 6.

[C0ckney]

The kingdoms were united in 160-something. James 1 and 6.

i believe that was known as just the "kingdom of great britain".

[C0ckney]

1801 then!

of course i consider representative democracy to be a sham, and thus that there are no true democracies. but leaving that to one side, it seems very dubious to call a country where people hold others in bondage, or one where the majority of the adult population can't vote a democracy.

of course it's a bit silly to look for a specific point at which a country becomes a democracy, and probably better to look at the development of democractic elements within a particular political system.

[Lorizael]

of course i consider representative democracy to be a sham, and thus that there are no true democracies. but leaving that to one side, it seems very dubious to call a country where people hold others in bondage, or one where the majority of the adult population can't vote a democracy.

of course it's a bit silly to look for a specific point at which a country becomes a democracy, and probably better to look at the development of democractic elements within a particular political system.

I am curious about what your definition of "true democracy" is, because I'd like to laugh at how hypocritical and limiting it (almost certainly) is.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If it's not the people's democracy, it's Racism!

(btw, I just realized how pleasant this conversation about a controversial topic has been without Ben or Kid to **** things up... huh)

[Felch]

of course i consider representative democracy to be a sham, and thus that there are no true democracies.

Thank God. You ever take the time to study the history of Athenian democracy? It made modern Greece look like a well run country.

[Proteus_MST]

of course i consider representative democracy to be a sham, and thus that there are no true democracies. but leaving that to one side, it seems very dubious to call a country where people hold others in bondage, or one where the majority of the adult population can't vote a democracy.

of course it's a bit silly to look for a specific point at which a country becomes a democracy, and probably better to look at the development of democractic elements within a particular political system.

I don´t see how practising (consensual) BDSM would lower the democratic value of a society

As for true democracy:
Well, then maybe you could call switzerland a true democracy. For important things there are Referenda in which the whole of society (of a eligible age for voting) can cast their vote.
(One example of an important decision decided by Referendum was the dscision to ban all Truck-Transit from Switzerlands streets and enforce that these Trucks travel through switzerland via train)

[C0ckney]

I am curious about what your definition of "true democracy" is, because I'd like to laugh at how hypocritical and limiting it (almost certainly) is.

a soceity where all hierarchies and systems of power over people, especially the patriarchy, the state, and the capitalist system have been destroyed. democratic control over every aspect of our lives, especially our workplaces and communities. you know, the usual anarchist stuff.

[C0ckney]

Thank God. You ever take the time to study the history of Athenian democracy? It made modern Greece look like a well run country.

i think i made it pretty clear that i don't believe a slave-holding society can be considered democratic.

[Lorizael]

a soceity where all hierarchies and systems of power over people, especially the patriarchy, the state, and the capitalist system have been destroyed. democratic control over every aspect of our lives, especially our workplaces and communities. you know, the usual anarchist stuff.

Way too vague. But I'm gonna go with the easy one first: in your democracy, at what age are children no longer considered slaves?