From: Grant Callaghan (email@example.com)
Date: Tue 10 Dec 2002 - 22:01:16 GMT
> > >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:14:11 -0600
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > > > > > When you say it "works" or "doesn't work" what do you mean?
> > > > > > What does it do or doesn't do that you think it must do?
> > > > > >
> > > > > It provides those who adopt it with a higher average standard of
> > > > > living than other models, just as democracy provides citizens
> > > > > with a greater voice and more personal freedom than other models
> > > > > (at least than any alternatives that have been tried).
> > > >
> > > > i think that above and beyond all that (which is somewhat
> > > > subjective, wouldn't ya say?), capitalism and "democracy" (yet to
> > > > be actually implemented, wouldn't ya say?) "work" because they
> > > > have the dynamic capacity to adopt strategies "on the fly" to
> > > > prevent other ideas from gaining enough footing to replace them.
> > > > the reason americans are conned into making a duality (communist
> > > > or capitalist, dictatorship or democracy) is because it keeps out
> > > > other ideas and prevents the CREATION of new ones. it discourages,
> > > > dissuades and otherwise destroys competition. the only reason
> > > > these two ideas stand at the forefront is because they can infect
> > > > more people, not because there is some qualitative superiority
> > > > inherent in them.
> > > >
> > >I would phrase it another way; these systems are perpetually
> > >evolutionary, and can change, in response to voter desires, to take
> > >advantage of the novel ideas and opportunities that the voters wish
> > >to implement. They are dynamic and evolutionary, rather than static
> > >and fixed, and engage in continuous elaboration and experimentation.
> > >Their futures are not dogmatically predetermined, so they can
> > >effectively respond to the unexpected exigencies of an unfolding
> > >history. And this is a GOOD thing.
> > > >
> > > > alfred
> > > >
> > What you call a thing doesn't always describe what it really is. The
> > Chinese now call their system communism with Chinese (meaning
> > capitalist) characteristics. But it has defenitely made a new country
> > out of China over the past 20 years.
>Economically, yes; we'll have to wait for the Tienanmen Square
>generation to completely mature into power and institute democratic
>reforms, particularly the vote, before the complementary political
>renewal can occur.
> > Grant
The word "democracy" is actually in both the Chinese and Taiwanese
constitutions. Both countries suspended that part of the constitution (they
said) because the war with each other took precedence. That's one reason
China threatened to nuke Taiwan if Chen Sui-bian got elected. The
communists could no longer claim that Chinese people were incapable of a
peaceful transfer of power in the democratic model. Now that Taiwan has
done it, they have no more excuses. And they don't have Chiang kai-chek to
kick around anymore.
They have experimented with democratic elections in a couple of small
provinces, but I don't see it happening on a national basis for a while.
The people with the guns are hanging on to political power with all the
strength they can muster. That's what Tienanmen was all about. Deng saw
the communists losing power and called in the Army to put a stop to talk
about democracy. As the middle class gets bigger and stronger, it might
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue 10 Dec 2002 - 22:03:01 GMT