Democracy is dead??

[Marie]

Correct, it would have been accurate to say "the package deal of monotheism". My bad.

About this tread's subject - interesting isn't it, that several people tried to discuss these ideas with you, to no avail.

If you can find a good, rational reason why a society where nine out of ten people had no rights could be democratic, I would be glad to hear and consider it.

Best regards and happy new year

Same.

 

[a.saccus]

Actually, the first real democracy, that is the first paricipatory or all-inclusive democracy, originated in America.
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/ wrote:
The people of the Six Nations, also known by the French term, Iroquois Confederacy, call themselves the Hau de no sau nee (ho dee noe sho nee) meaning People Building a Long House. Located in the northeastern region of North America, originally the Six Nations was five and included the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, migrated into Iroquois country in the early eighteenth century. Together these peoples comprise the oldest living participatory democracy on earth. Their story, and governance truly based on the consent of the governed, contains a great deal of life-promoting intelligence for those of us not familiar with this area of American history. The original United States representative democracy, fashioned by such central authors as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, drew much inspiration from this confederacy of nations. In our present day, we can benefit immensely, in our quest to establish anew a government truly dedicated to all life's liberty and happiness much as has been practiced by the Six Nations for over 800 hundred years.

As you can see from my location, I live in that very part of the country that was once free and the source of genuine democratic spirit. About three weeks ago I spent an unusually frustrated entire morning trying to find out what you have just presented here. Much appreciated. Thanks.

 

[a.saccus]

Democracy, n. […] A meaning doing more justice to current democracies would be to understand the word as deriving from the greek Deimos ("dread" or "terror") and Cratos, thus correctly spelled Deimocracy and meaning Rule by Terror.

Looking up democratia in the standard Liddell & Scott Greek English Lexicon online, we find:

de^mokratia.
A. I.democracy, popular government….(links to Herodotus, Antiphon, Demosthenes, etc.)
II. personified….(links to Pausanias, Aristotle, etc.)

There is, unfortunately, no etymology in the online version, and the definition isn’t too informative either; so we must dig deeper. A word related to “demokratia" and immediately preceding it in my bookshelf copy of the “Intermediate" Liddell & Scott Lexicon does help:

de^mokrateomai.
…(de^mos, krateo)
to have a democratical constitution,to live in a democracy.

Back to the online edition of the Lexicon for demos

de^mos. I. district, country, land,
2. the people, inhabitants of such a district
II. hence (since the common people lived in the country, the chiefs in the city), the commons, common people…in an army, rank and file, opp. officers…
2. metaphorical…
III. in a political sense, the sovereign people, the free citizens…
2. popular government, democracy…
3. the popular assembly…
IV. township, commune;… in indications of origin…
V. name for a prostitute….
VI. faction in the circus….

As you can see, in spite of the rather extensive listings for “de^mos" , there is nothing even remotely related to “dread" or “terror". Thus your statement cited above is not an etymology, but the expression of an opinion via etymological means.

If I were to propose an etymology suitable to the true spirit of “democracy," I would suggest “de^mos" along with the verb “krino" , which gives us the noun“krisis":

krisis
1.separating, distinguishing…
2. decision; without truth, no certain means of judging; title of a play by Sophocles on the Judgement of Paris…
3. choice, election…
4. interpretation of dreams or portents….
II. judgement of a court; trial, suit; to be put on one's trial,
b. result of a trial, condemnation…
c. Day of Judgement, Ev.Matt.10.15.
2. trial of skill or strength…
3. dispute….
III. event, issue… to be decided, of a war, … suppose the issue depends upon my public measures…
2. turning point of a disease, sudden change for better or worse…
IV. middle of the spinal column....

Democracy requires the ability to separate and distinguish the true from the false, and to have the backbone to choose what is true. Without that knowledge and that choice, all is indeed chaos and terror.

 

[a.saccus]

Regarding the etimology dear name since i am greek i can tell you that ''cratos'' means ''state'' in free translation and not force. Further more demos means "people" and has nothing to do with deimos. I do not know were you found the etimology but being greek i tell you i would not trust this reference since they seem not to check what they say, at least for that particular item. Therefore the true meanign of ''democracy'' is people state.

Although I do not speak Modern Greek, I do know Ancient Greek fairly well and can assure you that “kratos" never meant “state" in Ancient Greek, although I can see how the word might have taken on that meaning over the centuries.

The Lexicon entry for “kratos" is substantial: Many references to Ancient Greek literature (with English translations) you might find interesting.

kratos

A. strength, might, in Hom. esp. of bodily strength;… this is what gives strength to iron;… with all one's might or strength;… take by storm….
II. power;…esp. of political power,… rule, sovereignty,….to be all-powerful,…. in real power, ….sovereign power,…
2. cum genitive, power over,… whoever have possession of the land,….
3. of persons, a power, an authority,…
III. mastery, victory, freq. in Homer,… the meed of highest valour, …
IV. Medic., in pl., ligaments,…
2. = back of the hand,…
V. Pythag. name for ten, …

The verb form is “krateo"

krateo

I. abs., rule, hold sway,…with mighty sway,…the ruler, (lyr.),…the lady of the house,…
2. in Poets, c. dat., rule among, …
3. c. gen., to be lord or master of, rule over,…to be master of,…to be above obedience,…
II. conquer, prevail, get the upper hand,….
b. to be superior,… to be the best,….
c. of reports, etc., prevail, become current, ….
2. c.inf., prevail so that,…impers.,'tis better to,…
3. c.gen., conquer, prevail over,… get the better of it,… surpassed, went beyond it,…is better than,…
b. of food, digest, assimilate….
4. c.acc., conquer, master,… outdo, … surpass, …Pass., to be overcome,…
III. become master of, get possession of,… have it at command, remember it,… master by the intellect,…:--Pass., to be mastered,
IV. lay hold of,…
2. c.acc.rei, seize, win and keep, esp.by force,… seize, hold fast, arrest, … secure, grasp,…
3. hold up, support,… maintain a military post,…; keep, retain,… has been reserved for, settled upon,…
4. in Law, possess a title to, …
b. sequester, place under embargo, …
5. hold in the hand, ….
6. endure, put up with,….
V. control, command, …
VI. repair, make good, …

As you can see, this word has much to do with control, with being on top, etc. But there is no “state" here; the word for that, of course, is “polis" . It would be interesting to trace the steps from the Ancient Greek to Modern Greek for that word.

The page to start at if you want to do your own Ancient Greek word searches is here.

Xaire!

 

[Mr. Premise]

OK, here's one: you are confusing "the people" with "human beings." In most societies only some of the human beings actually qualified as "the people." Not fair, but true. So if democracy means 'rule by the people' then Athens could be considered democratic.

If you can find a good, rational reason why a society where nine out of ten people had no rights could be democratic, I would be glad to hear and consider it.

 

[Kesdjan]

OK, here's one: you are confusing "the people" with "human beings." In most societies only some of the human beings actually qualified as "the people." Not fair, but true. So if democracy means 'rule by the people' then Athens could be considered democratic.

Democracy is a form of government in which power ultimately comes from the people governed.

You see, leaving out even one word is enough to corrupt your reasoning faculty- your only defence against lies and evil. The people governed by a government include all human beings, not just those recognized by law.

Dear Kes so according to the united nations the slaughter of the indians does not qualify as genocide because we donot have accurate figures....

No... this is not what I said at all- please read more carefully.

You also mention that massacres happened from the side of the settlers and the native indians.

See... you can understand written language when you want to.

I wonder if another country or group of people invade your area and starts killing what the local people do?

What?!?... the settlers invade and start killing anything that moves- you've either been watching too many movies or reading too many radical-politically-correct-revisionist "history" books.

Keep records to make sure it is recorded as genocide or fight back.

Did you even read what I wrote about genocide?

The natives were invaded, their land taken away from them, they were in most cases attacked without reason and after we accuse them for fighting back, yes they should have just rolled back and died like good savages....

This sentence is a string of assumptions, i.e. assertions without evidence. Where are your data?

Sorry but if anybody attacks my country i will fight back with everything i have.

Great... but one purpose of this website is to teach people that this is not the only option they have.

I can see that you have a set of ideas which you believe that they are true and not wanting to move from them no matter what therefore i will not reply.

Another case of the patient diagnosing the doctor.

Andreas, what I see as your blocks in understanding come from two basic assumptions.
1. You assume that european immigrants to America in colonial times were evil bloodthirsty murderers. My current understanding, based on the evidence I have so far (and I do not have all the evidence nor have I done a rigorous study of this period history) is that while there were isolated incidents of violence, the majority of american indian deaths during colonial times was probably due to the introduction of foreign substaces such as alcohol, and exposure to foreign pathogens (viruses, microbes, etc.). I do not know how many deaths are attributed to disease, war, massacres, etc. and would state definatively anything. I will say, however, what the limited evidence I have seems to suggest. Besides, the only reason I brought up colonists/the republic is because of a misunderstanding on your part. It has little if anything to do with my original assertion, and does nothing but contribute noise.
2. You assume that Athens is the holy cradle of civillazation. While the technological achievements of ancient Greece were superior to civalizations that appeared much later in history, such as the native american societies and even the technology of midieval europe, the moral/philosophical achievements of some native american societies were vastly superior. Please re-read my previous post.

Regards,
Kesdjan
P.S. Are you sure the greeks invented the periodic table of elements- I thought they created the elemental theory of matter which consisted of wind, water, fire, and air (some systems also had quintessence, soul, etc. for a fifth element). It would be great if you could give a source for that.

 

[eagles fly free]

qte

P.S. Are you sure the greeks invented the periodic table of elements- I thought they created the elemental theory of matter which consisted of wind, water, fire, and air (some systems also had quintessence, soul, etc. for a fifth element). It would be great if you could give a source for that.

unqte

Your statement comes into contradiction in what all scientists say all over the world... They have created it and listed all known elements at their period of time leaving gaps in between them that were later filled up with no mistakes. Aristotelis first and Dimocritos after were the ones.

In modern times many claim to be the 'fathers' or 'mothers' of the periodic table as we know it today with Dmitri Ivancritch Mendeléeff in the year 1864 being the one most quote. Also in 1863, a 44 year old French geologist, A. E. Béguyer de Chancourtois created a list of the elements arranged by increasing atomic weight.

Regarding the settlers intentions i wish to remind you that they were coming from the same vations that whipped out all the ancient Aztecs and everybody else around them.... Yes i do tend to assume things based in movies as you suggest.... or this did not happen and it was an invention of hollywood?

Dear Marie,

When i say something i am sure for what i am talking about. Saying that ancient civilisations were monotheistic i would expect to hear by somebody that does not have a clue about what he/she is talking about or is reading the wrong books. Also since you keep on saying about slaves and the women being forced to become Hetairas i willask you something. Do slaves get paid? As far as i know at least slaves are not paid....

Also apart of one website that was a personal one and not a univercity or any organisation NOBODY says that women in ancient athens were beaten systematicaly as you suggest. Beter get your references right i think.

It seems that i have stirred up some arguments here but today my daughter is returning to me and that means i am off, all my free time belongs to her...

Happy new year all and smile always, it makes the others wonder

 

[Marie]

Your statement comes into contradiction in what all scientists say all over the world... They have created it and listed all known elements at their period of time leaving gaps in between them that were later filled up with no mistakes. Aristotelis first and Dimocritos after were the ones.

Then surely you can provide a link? Because a search for Dimocritos and "periodic table" failed to turn up a single relevant link. As we all know, the periodic table is organized by atomic weight - surely you can at least show that the greeks had notions of atomic weight?

And yes, saying Mesopotamia and ancient Greece were monotheistic was a rather stupid mistake, to which inattention and tiredness contributed - and I admitted the mistake too, whereas you have said several things that were pointed out to be false, and afterwards simply ignored them.

And I never said that women were beaten systematically, what I said is and I quote :

in our world violence is the almost unavoidable result of social, legal and economic disempowerment - which happens to be the condition ancient Greek women were stuck in. For proof of this causal link one may look at any current day big society.

Which, by the way, is a fact recognized by social scientists the world over. You are twisting my words, trying to set up a straw man.

Plus you keep eluding the fundamental subject of the thread. The question has been asked before, and you either refused or neglected to answer. So I am going to lay it out for you, in plain, simple english, and if you are going to waste any more of our time you might at least try to adress it. Here goes:

The very basis of the democratic principle is that ALL people being governed have a say in the way they are governed. Otherwise said, self-determination for all individual as well as groups. Ancient Greece applied those principles to only a small minority of its inhabitants, therefore it wasn't democratic. Please try to show how this is false.

 

[christx11]

From what I can find it appears Dimocritus and perhaps his teacher Leucippus are first mentioned with coming up with the atomist idea and Aristotelis actually was opposed to the idea, a critic of it. Also from what I can find Dimocritus lived ~460 BCE --> ~370 BCE, Aristotelis about 384 BCE to about 322 BCE. I am not sure why Aristotelis would come up with an idea that he was against. Also the atomist theory/idea was primitive in that it was an idea that the material world could not be divided infinitely, it had a lower limit that was a basic unit and that was the atom. To extrapolate this into the creation of the periodic table of elements which implies knowing atomic weights and eventually protons/neutrons/electrons, etc. seems a bit farfetched. But then again Al Gore invented the Internet, No?

It seems to me that Andreas is playing the 'Patriotic Program', defending the country, etc. perceiving that his country of origin and its greatness is being attacked which of course requires the Pavlovian playback of a deeply embedded neural program to defend and counter-attack. The only problem is that there was no attack, and ultimately there is nothing to defend except a false self image of our own self importance. Ethnocentrism, Egocentrism, each are just a glimpse of how deep the rabbit hole goes with a dedicated portion non-prejudically apportioned and even perhaps reserved for every individual.

It is funny how seeing what we face is a psychological infection and it is funny how we are so blind to seeing it.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Marie, search under Democritus and you'll find stuff. Also, Aristotelis is usually spelled Aristotle in english.

Your statement comes into contradiction in what all scientists say all over the world... They have created it and listed all known elements at their period of time leaving gaps in between them that were later filled up with no mistakes. Aristotelis first and Dimocritos after were the ones.

Then surely you can provide a link? Because a search for Dimocritos and "periodic table" failed to turn up a single relevant link. As we all know, the periodic table is organized by atomic weight - surely you can at least show that the greeks had notions of atomic weight?

 

[john_s]

Democracy, as a c-o-n cept pertaining to liberty and rights, is perhaps the best weapon of mass destruction ever empolyed against humanity by sts/physcopath beings, both human and other. Democracy, as an end, needs to die a final death. A constitutional republic, with inaleinable rights (as opposed to civil rights), even if imperfect, is far better. Especially if only free individuals (as opposed to citizens) with a basic, working knowledge of the constitution are allowed, by law, to choose representatives (as opposed to leaders) through a democratic prosess (which is NOT the same as a democracy).

The -u-nited States of America (the -u-nion of sovereign nation States) is, in fact, a constitutional republic as opposed to the -U-nited States (the District of Columbia and possesions). Confusion arises because since the time of the war between the States the District of Columbia has been able to extend unlawful influence beyond it's ten mile square confinement and into the States. D.C. is a pure democracy within it's geographical domain. And it's a pure nightmare. Look at the choas and confusion and violence it has caused in the States. Look at the sixty trillion note debt it is trying to offload on the people of the States. Look at the wars and the oceans of innocent blood it has poured onto the grounds of other nations. Democracy. Coming to your neighborhood soon. Very soon.

There are five ypes of individual who will argue for democracy as a form of government. Lizards, physcopaths, OPs, cowards, willfully unintelligent human beings.

Watch.

John_s

 

[vinny]

There are five ypes of individual who will argue for democracy as a form of government. Lizards, physcopaths, OPs, cowards, willfully unintelligent human beings.

it is not that simple. Psychopaths will use ANY ideology, and undermine it for their own ends. It can be called 'democracy', 'communism', 'free market economy', 'christianity', 'progress', 'enlightenment', 'science', 'divine law' or anything else.

The original sentiment of democracy, to which most normal human beings still incorrectly ascribe to its modern usage (which keeps them trapped in the illusion), is that of representation in goverment, of ALL the people, and thereby some kind of 'consensus rule' whereby the will of the people is put into practice by their elected representatives. Of course this isn't what happens in practice. the same could be said of any other ideology. How this works is expanded in great detail in 'Political Ponerology' by Andrew Lobaczewski.

It's potency as a pathocratic weapon, is the same as with all ideologies - that normal human beings subscribe an underlying meaning to it which it DOES NOT have in its ponerized form.

 

[Joe]

There are five ypes of individual who will argue for democracy as a form of government. Lizards, physcopaths, OPs, cowards, willfully unintelligent human beings.

Watch.

John_s

You're missing the point. It's not the form of government, it's the type of human being behind it. And your list above is somewhat hysterical, apart from the psychopath part

Joe

 

[john_s]

sleepyvinny wrote:

"It is not that simple. Psychopaths will use ANY ideology, and undermine it for their own ends. It can be called 'democracy', 'communism', 'free market economy', 'christianity', 'progress', 'enlightenment', 'science', 'divine law' or anything else."

Well, I was actually making a comparison of the completely insecure form of "government" known as democracy and the more (but not perfectly) secure form of "representative service" known as a constitutional republic with a democratic process for qualified individuals to choose their representive servants. So, yes it actually is that simple if you maintain a line of reasoning parallel to that which I presented.

As regards 'Political Ponerology' , it is good that these perceptions have been formatted to fit the present time, but they are by no means newly discovered. They have been known for as long as souled individuals have been on the face of this earth. Sadly, with the advent and growth of mass communication structures, souled individuals have lost, to a large degree, their ability of intuitive logic. It has always been known that there are certain persons and groups that one should beware of. It has always been known that there are certain "signs" that indicate inherently bad persons or groups.
The lizzies are extremely intelligent. They know that the volume and quality of an individuals view points can be collapsed to a narrow and unclear focus. They know that an individual can easily be made to confuse data with knowledge at which point the individual may have a tremendous store of data but actually know little or nothing. To have knowledge is to know. To have data is simply to have data. So, one can have all of the data presented in 'Political Ponerology' and still be without authority to promote change because one still does not know. Knowingness is the ability to use data. Now, when I made a comparison of democratic "govern"ment, which is, in essence, mob rule, to a constitutional republic my intent was to show that the constitutional republic actually has in place some protections against the five types of individuals who would argue for being governed as opposed to those who prefer that the life, liberty and persuit of happiness as well as the organic and civil rights of all individuals be represented and protected.
It really is that simple. I did make the assumptiom that certain precepts and knowledge were commonly held and apparent. If I was mistaken, then I apologize for that.



Joe wrote:

"You're missing the point. It's not the form of government, it's the type of human being behind it. And your list above is somewhat hysterical, apart from the psychopath part."

Please refer to my statement above concerning parallel reasoning. I am not missing any point, Joe, you are.

Please note, also, the stark difference between your reply and sleepyvinny's reply. Sleepyvinny pointed out what he perceived as an incompleteness in my reasoning which seems, to me, to be the result of my original posting being less that clear. If, indeed, this is the case, then I accept my fault. However, Joe, you have, without justification, accused me of being "somewhat hysterical". This constitutes a form of assault, as if you are trying to defend yourself from something in the list that struck a nerve. You did not even consider the bulk of the post, Joe, only the list. Do you see a threat to yourself in that list, Joe?
Please note also, Joe, that this forum is read by -many- people who choose not to participate for whatever reason. Many people, Joe. You have put yourself on the Watch list.
Your reply or non reply to this communication may cause serious doubt Lauras' integrity and abilities as well as cause serious doubt about the nature and motives of the C's. Weight your actions carefully, Joe.

john_s

 

[salleles]

It is really heartwarming that you are so concerned about Laura's integrity, the 'nature and motives' of the C's, and the wellbeing of Joe in particular:

Weight your actions carefully, Joe (...) Please note also, Joe, that this forum is read by -many- people who choose not to participate for whatever reason. Many people, Joe. You have put yourself on the Watch list.

Pardon me?