Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

China says Kenya violence proof Western democracy unsuitable

Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 11:52 PM EST 15/01/08

Says traditional systems ignored when former European rulers ‘tyrannically' imposed Western democratic systems upon independence ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Frank Lee My Dears I Don't Give A Damn from Toronto, Canada writes:
    And the Chinese aren't playing at economic politics here? As the honesty brokers that they are, they're just giving an honest opinion, never mind trade, or economics. And they really know about democracy, a la Tienanman Square?
  2. dallas mcquarrie from RERegina, Canada writes: China says " ... traditional systems were ignored when former European rulers “tyrannically&8221; imposed Western democratic systems upon independence..."

    That's exactly what the tyrant communists did in China - ignored traditional Chinese practise to impose their own military tyranny on their fellow countrymen. And it's exactly what they did in Tibet, and now have the distinction of having oppressed the Tibetan people almost as long as their own. China's military dictatorhip has no lessons to teach anyone about anything. They are the among the worst human rights offenders on the globe and and the hell they have created for so many of their own people testifies to their own malice and love of violence.

    Memo to the Chinese leadership: You don't fool anyone! Stick you stupid comments where the sun doesn't shine!
  3. John Thatcher from Canada writes: I am no admirer of the Chinese, and I certainly don't have my head swirling in the glamour some seem to view covering the Chinese like a cloud of mystic mist. Yet as far as I know, the current Communist Dynasty is the best dynasty the Chinese have ever had. Living standards are higher in China even for subsistence farmers than they have ever been in the past 3,000 years. It's very difficult to argue with success.
    China and Tibet have been exchanging control of their territories for about 1,600 years. The Tibetans have controlled huge regions of China for centuries at least three times in the past. The situation in the present is merely a continuation of the same old, same old. To imagine that either side is good or bad, right or wrong in the tennis match is missing the point, in a shallow and superficial way.
    After all, everything the commentary in the People's Daily says about the Western colonialism in Africa is true and correct. The deceitful hypocrisy of Western commentators criticizing the Chinese for 'maintaining friendly relations with authoritarian leaders' is more laughable than contemptible.
  4. Luke R from Toronto, Canada writes: That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard. I can't believe the Chinese actually have the audacity to say that out loud. I also love how they coveniently overlook all the "real" democracies in the world (North America, Europe, etc.) where democracy doesn't lead to violence. I guess when you cherry pick "evidence" you can prove and "thesis" you want.
  5. gerhard beck from Canada writes: Kenyan Democracy? lol.
  6. deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: "In its commentary Monday, the People's Daily also said that colonialism was to blame for ongoing tribal and ethnic strife in Africa because European rulers turned native societies against each other to facilitate their rule."

    Politically correct, no doubt, but wrong nonetheless. The "tribal and ethnic strife" predates European meddling.

    Similarly, European history itself is an endless series of ethnic and tribal wars. Only the horrors of the 20th century made people there reconsider. A comfortable standard of living was certainly a factor as well. And in that sense the Chinese paper may be on to something: Increase prosperity and wars might become less common.

    As Chinese involvement is fairly recent, only future will tell whether they will leave more of the wealth generated behind than Europeans did. Count me a sceptic.
  7. Don Quixote from the Banana Belt, Canada writes: Sorry to say: Democracy still is the best way of governance with the grassroot of the population, the masses if you will having a say how they get governed by electing representatives themselves.
    Dictatorial governments may bring stability to the population, but it's governance is only as good as the dictator(s) are themselves, a lot of them tend to be ruthless bullies and not always as clever as broadcasted.
  8. Joe Canadian from Canada writes: Ah the good old my way or your dead communists preaching their good word.
  9. Communism doesnt wrk from who cares, Canada writes: I beleive this article is very acurate.

    More bleeding heart, teary eyed liberals posting again this morning. How can a "western" democratic process work in countries where tribal authority and tribal conflict superceed moderate calm discussion and accetptance of one and all beliefs?

    It works in "Western" countries because we colonized the countries that we now inhabit, and we imported enough cheap labour to the countries that we colonized to create a multicultural society.

    China is doing Africa a great service. It is giving them jobs.

    Besides we should all be happy that we have found a source of cheap labour ..... If wages in China go up then we may all have to pay another 5-10 dollars for our purchases at Wall Mart and Costco.

    So if you shop at those stores ..... shut the hell up!
  10. Steven L from Canada writes: Many comments here miss a point: democracy is best but not necessarily or automatically suitable.

    Recent international headlines such as Iraq, Afganistan also prove imposed democracy are unsuitable.

    While promoting our democratic value worldwide, it is better let other people decide what political system they want.
  11. Larry Hill from Canada writes: Steven L from Canada writes: Many comments here miss a point: democracy is best but not necessarily or automatically suitable

    Actually I tend to agree with your comment...

    While promoting our democratic value worldwide, it is better let other people decide what political system they want

    But can you not see the contradiction in this last comment? How do they every get the system they want?? Would someone knowingly vote for a dictator?? A brutal, repressive regime like Communist China??

    Without democracy how do you really know if the people wanted it? Going by the word of those in power???

    I
  12. Negy H from Toronto, Canada writes: Let me try to make it clear to you, Larry. The ultra goal for a society is to get people live better, and happier. Social systems are just a tool, or an environment to help to get to the ultra goal. Democracy or communism or whatever social systems itself is not the goal. Just see if the people in that country live richer and better under the system, you can get the conclusion if the social system is right. Base on this defination of what is the right social system, we can easily tell that democracy is good for westerns, but not good for Afganistan or Iraq or Kenya. For China, you cannot ignor the facts that China has never been so strong in the world back to their 200 years of history. Chinese have never lived better in their thousands of years of history. Although China is still not perfect, no one is, and China is still poorer and less 'civilize' than western countries, China is in its best condition since the past thirty years of economic and social revolution. Then, I feel confortable to say the communism or whatever social system it is now is good for China. Democracy? Maybe it's better for China, but it's too risky to test this hypothesis. Think about how many population in China, and how powerful their military power is, the nukes for example, it would be a disaster to the whole world if China is in chiaos. Comments to dallas mcquarrie from RERegina. Don't be fooled by Dalai Lama. Tibet was slaverism when Dalai was in power before 1951. That's fact. Google it if you don't believe me. I don't believe slaves had better human rights than people governed by Chinese communist government.
  13. Negy H from Toronto, Canada writes: Let me try to make it clear to you, Larry. The ultra goal for a society is to get people live better, and happier. Social systems are just a tool, or an environment to help to get to the ultra goal. Democracy or communism or whatever social systems itself is not the goal. Just see if the people in that country live richer and better under the system, you can get the conclusion if the social system is right. Base on this defination of what is the right social system, we can easily tell that democracy is good for westerns, but not good for Afganistan or Iraq or Kenya. For China, you cannot ignor the facts that China has never been so strong in the world back to their 200 years of history. Chinese have never lived better in their thousands of years of history. Although China is still not perfect, no one is, and China is still poorer and less 'civilize' than western countries, China is in its best condition since the past thirty years of economic and social revolution. Then, I feel confortable to say the communism or whatever social system it is now is good for China. Democracy? Maybe it's better for China, but it's too risky to test this hypothesis. Think about how many population in China, and how powerful their military power is, the nukes for example, it would be a disaster to the whole world if China is in chiaos. Comments to dallas mcquarrie from RERegina. Don't be fooled by Dalai Lama. Tibet was slaverism when Dalai was in power before 1951. That's fact. Google it if you don't believe me. I don't believe slaves had better human rights than people governed by Chinese communist government.
  14. Steven L from Canada writes: Larry Hill:

    You ask a very interesting question.

    Unfortunetly, reality is often a far cry from ideal. If a tryout of democracy results in chaos or even civil war (look at Iraq), who is to blame? Could you undo what has been done in Iraq? I am not saying dictatorship in Iraq was good. It is just the country is not ready for democracy and Iraqi people pay the price of their life for Bush's tryout.

    The transition of dictatorship to democracy is not a new concept. South Korea and Taiwan are the latest examples. China seems to be on the track as well. A recent article in Aisa Times gave a unbiased description on this trend.
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HC09Ad02.html
  15. True Canadian from Hamilton, Canada writes: All big powers like US and China have their puppet states. Usually these states either have strategic location interests or a lot of natural resources.

    US has Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt to name few where there is no real democracy exists!

    China has Burma, Tibet, Laos, Sudan for their own purposes.

    It is just pot calling the kettle black. At the end of the day, it is the poor innocent civilians who suffer.
  16. Ken Hass from Canada writes: Democracy can only exist in nations that have little or no corruption.
    That leaves out China, the whole Islamic world, most of South America, Central America, all of Africa and other parts of the world.
    Sad but true.
    If Canada keeps on allowing immigration from nations with a history of crime and corruption then Democracy will cease here also.
  17. Ken Hass from Canada writes: Before you can have Democracy you must have honor and decency.
  18. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: BARAQ OBAMA'S COUSIN IS LEADING THE CHARGE FOR ISLAMIC LAW IN KENYA.

    US media is covering this up...right wing will unleash it if Obama wins the dem nomination.
  19. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: China is doing Africa a great service. It is giving them jobs.
    ____________-

    Source of slave labour and cheap resources with little resistance.

    Oh, it's that "we have standards liberal type crap" resistance that the Commo/fascists hate so much.
  20. harry carnie from Northern, B.C., Canada writes: Well ......China IS correct...suppose anyone.. any country, does get it right once in a while.
  21. j q from Canada, writes: Ken Hass from Canada wrote, "Before you can have Democracy you must have honor and decency."

    How delightful it must be for the self righteous to view themselves with such purity. I suppose this is more convenient than reality.

    What underpins every political system is both honorable and unsavoury. However, the first world democracies (led by the U.S. with their record of bullying, interventionism, and militarism), are true believers. All must follow their version of "democracy" and if it is inconvenient to do so, then a fine dictatorship will do as long as it is appropriately in our camp.

    Such pragmatism in face of such hypocrisy must be at the core of the 'honor and decency' so highly regarded.
  22. W L from Canada writes: LOL!!! Honor & decency a prerequisite of democracy? Then what is the Mulroney / Schreiber affair? What is the Liberal's sponsorship scandal? Are these acts of honor & decency?

    And don't tell me that Mulroney, Schreiber, Chretien, Pelletier etc. are of Chinese, South American, Central American, or African origin or Muslim faith.

    Canada was a British colony. A rather successful one at that since we don't have mass killings after elections. The difference between Canada and the African colonies is that the Europeans not only killed off many native North Americans they also spent 100 years sending them to Residential schools to brain wash them all and wiped out their own religion, culture, believes and way of life. The peace we enjoy today is due in part to wiping out a civilization's way of life.

    Corruption and other injustices are happening everywhere. It's just some people's egos are so hight that they refuse to recognize that it is happening in their own back yard or they have lost their objectivity to accept that the country they live in is built on the corpses of the people who originally inhabited this land.

    Before we criticize African violence, ask ourselves what the Europeans did to the people who were here first.
  23. j q from Canada, writes: Democratic exceptionalism! Is no different than those that came before it.

    Colonial exceptionalism predicated on bringing European civilization to the world. The peoples, tribes, and ethnic nations were correctly suppressed for objecting. (ie. Britain in Iraq, 1920's)

    Allied exceptionalism during WWII defending the innocent against Axis power facism. The latter was not the correct facism imposed by the Western powers. (ie. Western concessions in China established from late 19th century)

    American exceptionalism predicated on defending the world. America's cause is right and we must understand that saving the world sometimes requires exceptional measures which we must condemn in the hands of others. (ie. Atomic bombs against Japan, Agent Orange in Vietnam, Depleted Uranium in the 1st Gulf War, and Clustered bombs delivered via the Israelis in the recent Lebanon War).

    No scepticism necessary. Democracy is of course the right cause for the right time! Honor and decency for all!!
  24. Still Learning at 77 from Canada writes: The US puts demands on countries when they invest in oil projects and China does not inter fear in the internal affairs of their oil suppliers. guess who wins. China of course.

    Have a good day everyone and may the grease money be returned to us.
  25. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: Still Learning at 77 from Canada writes: The US puts demands on countries when they invest in oil projects and China does not inter fear in the internal affairs of their oil suppliers.
    ___________-

    Are you nuts? China puts massive demands and controls internal affairs in each nation they set up shop!!!
  26. X. T. from Canada writes: Clark The Mighty from Canada writes:
    Are you nuts? China puts massive demands and controls internal affairs in each nation they set up shop!!!
    ------------------------------------------------
    Can you specify?

    Here are some examples of what US did:
    - They overthrew an elected government in Iran and propped the Shah;
    - They used covert missions to wreak havocs in Central and South America;
    - Iraq
    - They have an organization called National Endowment For Democracy, who took over the covert job from CIA, pumping money into other countries to support their favorite candidates
  27. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: XT, the Chinese gov't is the most politically interfering entity in Africa right now!

    I know Canada is full of rednecks, and that no one here sees China as the power it is becoming, and that Canadian women make you long for the sleek chicks of home, and the high tax rate in Canada is suffocating but don't be a fool!

    Mao loved Africa for solidarity. Hence, all the African students allowed into China (just don't touch the women!) Now Africa is the "new colonies" for China. It's the "new" exploitation!

    And you know you love it, deep down.
  28. X. T. from Canada writes: Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: XT, the Chinese gov't is the most politically interfering entity in Africa right now!

    I know Canada is full of rednecks, and that no one here sees China as the power it is becoming, and that Canadian women make you long for the sleek chicks of home, and the high tax rate in Canada is suffocating but don't be a fool!

    Mao loved Africa for solidarity. Hence, all the African students allowed into China (just don't touch the women!) Now Africa is the "new colonies" for China. It's the "new" exploitation!

    And you know you love it, deep down.
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Again, how does China interfere with their internal affairs? Name calling such as 'new colonies' or 'new exploitation' doesn't cut it.

    Do you mean China is interfering with Africa countries' internal affairs simply because China accepts students from African countries? So those people do not deserve education. Good to know.
  29. Joseph T from Victoria, Canada writes: Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: "and that Canadian women make you long for the sleek chicks of home">> are you saying that Canadian women are fat, Clark? Or are Canadian men equally as fat?
  30. Joseph T from Victoria, Canada writes: A Canadian single man comes home from work, sees what's in the fridge and goes to bed...A Canadian married man comes home and sees what's in the bed and goes to the fridge.
  31. Peter Amenhotep from Calgary, Canada writes: A question Ive had for a while:
    Kenya, India, Pakistan, Hongkong....... had never tasted democracy before their 'democratic' colonial master had to let them go. Whats funny is ever after the ex-masters has never stopped pushing democracy in these areas. So is democracy really universally good for people in whichever country? Or is it that a pre-mature democratic post colonial country is easier to control than , say, a nationalist autocratic one? England, France, America etc. didn't turn democratic from monarchy/colonism over night, why has it been done to these african/asian countries.
  32. Erbil K. from Germany writes: the communists in china didn t read marx : since he believed the formula : economics = politics .
  33. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: China and its people need to be contained within their borders. The first priority must be to halt their economic growth, to put downward pressure on their ability to spend.
  34. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: If anyone is interested, do some research. China sees a land that's weak and comes in and exploits.

    The old colonialists would blush at what they are doing!

    As the Chinese say: first a Black slave...soon a White slave.
  35. X. T. from Canada writes: Erbil K. from Germany writes: the communists in china didn t read marx : since he believed the formula : economics = politics .
    --------------------------------------------
    I assure you they have read a lot of it, and more than you do.

    Your explanation of Marxism is too simplified. Yes, I believe much of his theory of production force is correct, but it does not come down simply as 'economy=politics'. Rather it is 'productive force decides production relations'. If I put into plain English, it is more like the level of development decides the production relations, which in turn translate into social systems. And the level of development does not only mean economy, but also other factors such as social development, technological advancement etc.

    And this theory is correct. It explains a lot of things in history, such as the failure of 'Great Leap Forward' and more recently Iraq.
  36. Wai Lee from Toronto, Canada writes: The reality is many countries and people are simply not ready for Western style democracy. Democracy needs certain organizations and practices to be successful. Literacy, an educated population, a free press, morally and intellectually powerful leaders. If a country is undeveloped and lacks these things, one tends to get weak corrupt governments where the politicians serve only to enrich themselves.

    I never believed democracy really matters that much to powerful countries like the United States. Lebanon is a democracy but that didn’t stop Israel from pummeling it in 2006. Ever noticed how all this talk about freedom and democracy that China must adopt never applies to docile monarchies in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and most of the American allies in the Middle East?
  37. Frank The Tank from Argentina writes: Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: China and its people need to be contained within their borders. The first priority must be to halt their economic growth, to put downward pressure on their ability to spend.

    --------------
    Too late ....30 million plus productive chinese are all over the world and they're all spying on you.
  38. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: Re: 30 million Chinese colonists living outside China. Its extraterritorial ambitions were foreseen long ago, earning it the name the yellow peril.
  39. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: Chris E, take off your Klan hat and breath some fresh air.
  40. Still Learning at 77 from Canada writes: Clark The Mighty-- would it shock you to learn that the Chinese outsmarted the Americans by not putting demands on other countries. Go check "China vs US and Oil" a documentary because you will not believe what I say so check for yourself.

    have a good day evryone and may the grease money be returned to us.
  41. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: Chinese put HUGE demands on other countries.

    Look at Tibet, HK, Turkestan region, and Taiwan.

    Now it's the African countries.

    It has just begun....
  42. X. T. from Canada writes: Clark The Mighty the Shanghai Pimp:
    Just focus on your business. You simply do not possess the knowledge and intellectual capability to talk about anything else.
  43. John Thatcher from Canada writes:

    Steven L - You're clearly right. I think the difference in South Korea and Taiwan was that the democratic system was the free choice of those people to make. It wasn't a pacifer that ousiders tried to shove down their throats by military force or the threat of force. For some wierd reason that seems to rub people the wrong way.

    What I've seen from history is that any political heirarchy can be a good system or a bad system, depending on how the theory is applied. Democracy obviously isn't succeeding in the Western nations. The only countries where the absolute majority of the adult citizenry even waste their time voting are Australia, where it's a crime not to vote, and Germany, where more than 75 percent of the people always vote, for some inexplicable reason.

    Even Canada and the USA try and cover up the fact that the majority of the population don't vote, by hopelessly exaggerating the number of non-citizen residents in the nations. More lies, damn lies, and statistics. Most Western nations haven't had an absolute majority of the electorate vote in any election in decades. There's plenty of activity in the decay of a corpse.

    On a final note, I'll just point out that the system of kingship and inheritance of the first-born son dragged us out of living in caves to the civilization we have today. If the system is so bad, then how did it get us from there to here?

  44. j q from Canada, writes: John Thatcher wrote, "...the democratic system was the free choice of those people to make."

    It must be noted that Taiwan was under martial law for 38 years, and was subjected to reppressive tactics beginning with the death of thousands of Taiwanese in the 228 incident of 1949. There was scant criticism from the international community and U.S. military aid was never interrupted.

    Since successful democracies are exemplified by economic success, a healthy middle class and the time to focus on founding a consensus, the size of the Taiwanese population at 22 million was a major factor in the fairly smooth and quick transition to democracy after martial law was lifted in 1987. Following the death of Chiang Jing kuo, there were no other political options but to turn to elections as a method of leadership changes if the established economic prosperity was to be sustained.
  45. John Thatcher from Canada writes: j q - Excellent point and thanks for making it. You're supporting the view that democracy and capitalism are inseparably joined, I assume. I admit I don't understand your emphasis on the size of the Taiwanese population. I definitely don't want to get involved in any discussion of the constant conflicts between the original natives of the island and the Chinese mainland invaders, that still cause so much grief and heartache today.
    I'm not sure how your post relates to my post, exactly. From what I was taught, there were plenty of strongmen around who could have forced a takeover when Chiang died. What my teachers told me was that democracy was forced on people, if you wish to put things like that, because it was the only path the various military officers could see to avoid bloodshed, fighting among themselves for power. I suppose that perspective could be snaked into something similar to what you posted, with enough stretched imagination.
  46. B.C. Expat from Ottawa, NCR, Canada writes: I can't believe that people here are honestly debating the merits of democracy in the 21st century. Some things are resolved with a very easy smell test.
  47. John Thatcher from Canada writes: Expat - Oh, like democracy stinks? Yes, I heartily agree.
  48. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: X. T. from Canada writes: Clark The Mighty the Shanghai Pimp:
    Just focus on your business. You simply do not possess the knowledge and intellectual capability to talk about anything else.
    _______
    I'm only working with your mei mei. Not at lot per charge, but quantity makes up for it. We're heading to Africa next.

    China is messing around in Africa. Do some research. They are the true "colonialists" buying out local tyrants to bash in the local population to work for them under their terms.

    Pure exploitation at it's worst.

    Their next plan is to do the same in North America.
  49. Cameron Simms from Canada writes: Yes we should all forgo are human rights and move towards dictatorships.

    And according to the Chinese the Africans are un-stable beasts who aren't civil enough to handle democracy.

    Should the world not be a little more concerned with these coments.
  50. Frank The Tank from Argentina writes: Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: Re: 30 million Chinese colonists living outside China. Its extraterritorial ambitions were foreseen long ago, earning it the name the yellow peril. -----------------

    Must suck being a racist in Vancouver. Especially now that the Asians have come to dominate you. Hard to burn down chinatown now without destroying half the city.
  51. B.C. Expat from Ottawa, NCR, Canada writes: John Thatcher from Canada writes: "Expat - Oh, like democracy stinks? Yes, I heartily agree."

    Lord, I hope you're being ironic. Or else if it's really all the same to you, why not move somewhere where you won't be saddled with these malicious, imperialist rights and freedoms?
  52. John Thatcher from Canada writes: Expat - It's my country too, in case you float around in a cloud somewhere up in the sky, and don't know anything about reality. Why don't you move, if you can't tolerate anyone who thinks differently than you do? What folk like me think is hardly original or novel. If you've never heard of questioning the merits of the democratic system before today, you've lead a very sheltered life.
  53. John Robinson from Canada writes: So what is your alternative John Thatcher? Dissent is a right in this country but not in China. You have a right to your opinion but what is the alternative??? I am speaking of Canada when I ask this. As someone pointed out, yes, to have a democracy an educated and active population is required. Also keep in mind that American democracy is an offshoot of British democracy. British democracy was a hard fought idea. A lot of blood over several civil wars. Even the good old Magna Carta was primarily aimed at giving the Barons a legal voice. The next development was to allow owners of land accruing a minimum of wealth a vote, after this landowners in general, after this men over a certain age with a trade, after this all men, after this women too. Takes a while but it is doable and in my opinion the best guarantee of freedom and growth. Perhaps the idea of 'dumping' democracy on an African nation is wrong. It would seem that by the lesson of history it should be phased in similarily. This would incite strokes in the left camp, it doesn't seem fair to the lower classes on the surface but it might work better as well as a inspire people to ambition rather than violence. Aristotle wrote that communism wouldn't work over 2300 years ago. Read his 'politics' on the subject. His statement can also be applied to democracy. We are not our brother's keepers. Jefferson's remark that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Marx makes some good points but overall he misjudged many things. The proletariat(a derogatory Roman term by the way) could never have done what he predicted. He wasn't lying but I think his pessimism simply led him the wrong way. Macchiavelli gives some important lessons on the idea too. It's too bad but Aristotle was correct when he stated that Doxa(opinion in general, or public opinon) was invariably wrong. It's taken a long time to evolve as we have, even with our penchant for instant gratification, give Africa time, they'll make it.
  54. B.C. Expat from Ottawa, NCR, Canada writes: John Thatcher from Canada writes: What folk like me think is hardly original or novel. If you've never heard of questioning the merits of the democratic system before today, you've lead a very sheltered life.

    Oh I've heard it, generally from university students who have no appreciation for what they've got, and from zealots who I would never want leading my country.
  55. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: The key feature of a civil society is LEGAL RIGHTS.

    There are none in China...as that would threaten the dictatorship.

    Lawyers are just so troublesome!
  56. John Thatcher from Canada writes: Try Terry Pratchett. Kingships, with primogeniture inheritence, got us from running around in the forest waving stone axes and wearing skins, to a planet of great civilizations. If that system is so bad, then how did it get us from there to here?
    Some folk just don't appreciate what they've got, or the work and sacrifices their ancestors made for them. Breath the free air deep. Molecules of your ancestors are in that free air. In the water you drink. The food you eat. They died so that you could live. I'm sure they'd be happy to see how thankful you are. They were forced to live under kings, so that you could sneer at their stupidity and ignorance. Some people have a strange way to use freedom. The freedom to scorn and disdain. The freedom to sneer and spit on graves. That must make some people feel nice.
  57. John Thatcher from Canada writes:

    Mr. Robinson - Please excuse me. I had no idea there was another adult on the thread. The points you make are realistic, naturally. I would mention that the beginnings of democracy in the West were hardly educated or active. Most people couldn't read, write, or perform addition and subtraction, and 98 percent of the populations were farming families from birth to death. The earlier experiments were based on slavery, so I hope you'll understand my opinion that they plainly don't count.

    What I think people object to is having democracy, or any foreign system of laws, forced on them, whether they want it or not. Especially when outsiders demand they stop following their ancient customs, as well as new written law. Most people are strongly attached to their customs, and being forced to give them up makes them very resentful and anger. I believe Cyrus or Darius was the one of the first to put that principle of rule in writing.

    Yet I honestly believe that kingship, and inheritance by primogeniture, is most likely the best human system. It worked very well for 10,000 years. Saying that it wouldn't work now seems very odd and peculiar to me. Tossing out the baby with the bathwater because of a few nutcases a few centuries ago seems very careless recipitance.

    After all, everyone knows that democracy doesn't work. Barely half the legal population vote in any election in any nation of the Earth but Australia and Germany. If people don't vote, that's not a democratic country. If an organization doesn't govern, then it's not a government. These things seem fairly obvious to the many people in the world that I agree with.

  58. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: How does a democracy work in a land of the brain-washed?

    Study Canada to see how.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.