The Atlas Society Forums

Search Sort Posts:  Oldest to newest Newest to oldest

12-23-2005, 12:06 PM Erik C. Christensen Joined on 12-08-2005 Posts 13 Re: Democracy This will be my last comment on this thread because I don't like to feed the trolls. B.R. said,"Notice how Christensen leaps straight for your comment about no longer calling yourself an objectivist rather than dealing with the substance of your post." Obviously Brad, you did not read my post, because first, I made the statement about being more Liberarian than Objectivist at the end of my post. And second , not only did I 'deal' with the substance of his post, I also exposed the egregious error of every claim of his. Read it, again.    Report

12-23-2005, 11:42 PM Andy_X69 Joined on 12-15-2005 Posts 75 Re: Democracy I never attempted to justify pure democracy (i.e. mass rule). I merely stated that to use the means of electoral democracy (which is not mass rule, it is an elected oligarchy, but it still sucks completely) to strengthen individual rights is akin to self-defense. May I also inject some context here? I am an Australian, voting is compulsory here, and Australia is the only western nation that does not have an explicit statement/acknowlegement of citizen's rights. Either way, I will not return to this thread. I do not want it to end up as a verbally-acidic festival of moral denunciations (like so many threads in so many Objectivist forums end up).    Report

12-24-2005, 12:16 PM Francois Tremblay Joined on 12-19-2005 Posts 18 Re: Democracy Yea, I guess it was easier for him to attack me (although it was pretty silly), then run away. Typical Randian...    Report

12-31-2005, 6:15 AM Luke Joined on 12-31-2005 Posts 6 Re: Democracy  Brad Reddekopp wrote: Democracy and liberty are so closely linked in the popular imagination that to separate the two seems unthinkable.  Perhaps it's time to think it.  Various arguments against democracy are found at donotvote.net and non-voters.org but the one that I find most interesting at this time is as follows: ultimately, democracy makes the absurd proposition that something is true or good if the majority say that it is true or good.  If the majority decide that capital punishment is good, then capital punishment is good.  If the majority want religion to be subsidized by tax dollars, then that is the right thing to do -- according to democratic principles.  (I'm assuming that to say that deciding what is the thing we should do, which is what democracy is all about, is the same as deciding what is the right thing to do.)  When confronted with democracy's flaws, defenders of democracy will often say, "It's not perfect, it's merely the very best that we've got".  Well, how are we going to discover a better way when we keep assuming that we've already got the best?  How are we going to get to something better if we each keep giving our personal sanction to the organized coercion that is democracy by voting in elections and referenda?  I've stopped voting.  How about you? "Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity has made them good."   - H. L. Mencken Democracy is the majority of "voters" not the majority of citizens living within its borders and it is freedom. Under freedom we can vote to protect individual right's and place any restriction upon its demise we deem necessary. The fact that it has not been done yet and you see what we have as the end result with only excuses only admits you have no concept of freedom and only see what others have done with it. Luke    Report

01-02-2006, 3:53 PM Francois Tremblay Joined on 12-19-2005 Posts 18 Re: Democracy So your excuse to support an evil political system that jeopardizes people's rights in the name of interest groups and popular beliefs is that... what ? Organized coercion could magically become better if everyone just agreed with you ? Consensus does not change reality. Surely an Objectivist does not believe in magical thinking ? (or am I too hopeful on this one ?)    Report

03-01-2006, 7:07 PM BridgetB Joined on 03-02-2006 Posts 2 Re: Democracy So Francois is against the use of force, ever!  He even seems to deny the use of retaliatory force or self-defense.  He also denies the magical.  I wonder how it is then that an entity using force to get its way should be stopped.  By thinking really hard about it?  Writing a blog?  Come on man.  The American Revolution was justified morally.  More concretely, either those men were going to have to stand up and defend themselves or live under the strong arm of a brutal monarchy, not to mention an insidious church. In the interest of a true philosophical discussion without floating abstractions: Francois, please clarify your stance on the use of force and justify your stance metaphysically. Thank you.    Report

03-02-2006, 10:57 PM Francois Tremblay Joined on 12-19-2005 Posts 18 Re: Democracy "So Francois is against the use of force, ever! " Please do quote me saying that. "The American Revolution was justified morally." No it wasn't. "More concretely, either those men were going to have to stand up and defend themselves or live under the strong arm of a brutal monarchy, not to mention an insidious church." Yea, that sure worked didn't it ? The US sure is freer, less brutal and less religious than the UK is now... Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ! Stupid American !    Report

03-12-2006, 7:25 PM devilsshadow Joined on 03-13-2006 Posts 1 Re: Democracy Interesting folks...I found myself recently attracted to objectivism not so much out of persuasion, but out of the fact that my "disconnected" search for truth led me to many of the same conclusions espoused by objectivist philosophers... democracy is one of those topics which i naturally came to question in terms of moral validity; and, in researching the context of the topic, it seems self-evident that many have divergent views as to what democracy is...fact is this, our founding fathers did NOT intend democracy to be a system where 51% of the population was able to oppress the other 49%; however, that is EXACTLY what we've turned our democracy into....we've allowed self-righteousness, arrogance, and empty pride to justify the fact that our "democracy" is turning our citizenry into a bunch of individual fascist authoritarians who are perfectly comfortable destroying the lives of those who disagree with them... if we are to propose a governmental system that is better than democracy, we must remind the citizens of the United States of the FACT that THIS IS NOT THE DEMOCRACY THEIR FOUNDING FATHERS ENVISIONED...in other words, if we propose a government that would be something like the ideal objectivist government, it must be equated with the democracy that was supposed to have been created with the Constitution....We must remind people of the FACT that IF the constitution were upheld in the purity of its ideals, it would IN FACT be an objectivist form of government where each individuals RIGHT to life, liberty, and property are genuinely respected and given as few limitations as possible, as was, IN FACT, the intent of the founding fathers... lookin' forward to the future convo peace, sean    Report

03-13-2006, 2:05 PM drc Joined on 03-13-2006 Posts 1 Re: Democracy    It always distresses me when I see people discussing our form of government here in the US as a democracy. It is not a democracy, was never intended to be a democracy and has never been a democracy. It is a republic. The founding fathers considered democracy  "the tyranny of the majority".     Along about the year I was born (1932) Franklin Delano Roosvelt started calling our system of government "democracy".  He knew better, but there was method to his madness. He knew that it is very difficult to stampede people in a republic to vote for something they don't  believe in. In a democracy it might be possible.    Roosvelt and his wife Eleanor were members of the Fabian Socialists. It was their intention to install a socialist  "paradise"  in the US.   It didn't turn out to be as easy as they thought, but we have come a long way  in the  intervening years.  Unless things change we will  be joining the happy socialists  of Europe soon. drc    Report

05-10-2006, 6:50 PM Yossarian Joined on 05-11-2006 Posts 2 Re: Democracy Francois, I don't think you've fully explained your position. You say that you do not support the use of force under any circumstances. How, then, are we to protect ourselves and defend our rights when faced with a sheer force and brutality?    Report

09-02-2008, 8:59 PM David George DeLancey Joined on 07-06-2007 Posts 48 Re: Democracy ......................./DEMOCRACY\................... Decisions Express Many On Current Realizations And Combining Yieldings 8:59 P.M. E.S.T. 9-2-2008    Report

12-09-2008, 10:28 AM VonBill Joined on 12-09-2008 Posts 2 Re: Democracy Amen. The days of Republic have passed into history, I fear.    Report

04-11-2009, 3:29 PM Martin Lundqvist Joined on 04-11-2009 Posts 15 Re: Democracy >"Francois, I don't think you've fully explained your position. You say that you do not support the use of force under any circumstances. How, then, are we to protect ourselves and defend our rights when faced with a sheer force and brutality?" Spot on! This is a big reason why I do not sympathise with libertarian anarcho-capitalism - it simply cannot properly provide the rights to life, freedom and property, which is essential to a capitalistic society.    Report

04-13-2009, 8:51 AM Josh Joined on 10-29-2006 Posts 67 Re: Democracy This is an old thread so I doubt you'll get many responses.  But just to keep discussion going, force can be used in response to force.  It should never be initiated under any circumstances.  I should also clear up your statement a little bit; rights to life, freedom and property are not provided, they are self evident (Each man is born with certain inalienable rights; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).  The only time they are infringed on is through the use of force.  A government's sole purpose is to protect individual's rights, sometimes using force to stop others from using force, or by simply making a decision in a legal dispute. I think you agree with this, but words and definitions are very important when communicating.  Anyone telling you otherwise is usually trying to get you to accept a premise that isn't true.    Report

Page 2 of 2 (29 items) < 1 2

The Atlas... » Ayn Rand's Idea... » General Discuss... » Democracy

(please select) Forums Home |- Search Forums |- Active Topics |- Unanswered Posts User Options |- Sign In |- Join this community |- Forgot Password Ayn Rand's Ideas |- General Discussion Ayn Rand's Novels |- Atlas Shrugged |- The Fountainhead |- We The Living |- Anthem |- Short Stories and Plays Ayn Rand's Films |- We The Living |- The Fountainhead |- Love Letters |- You Came Along |- Atlas Shrugged Special Interest |- Meet Members |- My Favorite Rand Character |- My Favorite Rand Passage |- If You Like Rand, You'll Like... Summer Seminars |- Summer Seminar 2007 |- Summer Seminar 2008 University Place and PSU