China Has an Invalid Government

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Many American elections are determined by an acceptable plurality rather than a majority.

We had a totally different voting system, the proportional representation.

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Many American elections are determined by an acceptable plurality rather than a majority.

We had a totally different voting system, the proportional representation.

Hitler's rise to power was entirely legal...and used legitimate means.

Deal with that...and then give the German civics lesson, Walter.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Many American elections are determined by an acceptable plurality rather than a majority.

We had a totally different voting system, the proportional representation.

]Hitler's rise to power was entirely legal...and used legitimate means.

Deal with that...and then give the German civics lesson, Walter.

I didn't want to suggest that illegal with my response. My bad.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

glitterbag wrote:
So please remember that this is not an all-night philosophy party
With all respect, I disagree.
I see this forum as being a lot like that, but 24/7.
David

Not the entire forum, David. It appears it is for Brandon, but he is not satisfied with exchanges of opinion. I suspect his statements of absolute are posted as if he is interested in opinion but he is much more interested in condemning all opinions than actually giving them any consideration. Those elements of others opinions that he can't completely dismiss, he considers those to prove his statement of absolute.
I've watched him do this relentlessly on the religious threads, and I really should not get engaged in anything he presents, because it is a complete waste of time. Brandon needs to hear complete agreement stated only in his approved wording. We've all met folks like this at work, or in our communities and at parties, ordinarily I can easily avoid these people. I usually know better than to linger in these pointless power struggles, so I'll use my best judgement and leave the diehards alone.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

So please remember that this is not an all-night philosophy party

OmSigDAVID wrote:

With all respect, I disagree.
I see this forum as being a lot like that, but 24/7.
David

glitterbag wrote:

Not the entire forum, David. It appears it is for Brandon, but he is not satisfied with exchanges of opinion. I suspect his statements of absolute are posted as if he is interested in opinion but he is much more interested in condemning all opinions than actually giving them any consideration. Those elements of others opinions that he can't completely dismiss, he considers those to prove his statement of absolute.
I've watched him do this relentlessly on the religious threads, and I really should not get engaged in anything he presents, because it is a complete waste of time. Brandon needs to hear complete agreement stated only in his approved wording. We've all met folks like this at work, or in our communities and at parties, ordinarily I can easily avoid these people. I usually know better than to linger in these pointless power struggles, so I'll use my best judgement and leave the diehards alone.

I respect every person 's right to choose
with whom he or she will debate.
I have always liked to argue; therefore, I 've had many debates,
most of which did not result in either side surrendering,
nor necessarily compromising his stance on the debated subject matter.
In my experience, thay can still be fun, anyway.

I don t know Brandon well enuf to comment on him, in particular.
I very seldom involve myself in theological discussion,
beyond a comment that our human bodies (like the exo-skeletons of lobsters)
can be molted off without loss of living consciousness, based on my experience.

www.IANDS.org

It seems to me that matters of radical controversy can be debated,
regardless of whether either side compromises his or her respective position.
Some can consider that to be waste of time; is observing art a waste of time??
I believe that radically controversial propositions can be debated
tho neither side surrenders e.g., freedom of abortion can be debated
be someone from Planned Parenthood and a fanatical Catholic
or
slavery can be debated between a black and a Southern white
or
national socialism can be debated between a Jew and a nazi theoretician.

Even if neither side changes his original position,
the debate can be interesting, in its own right, or so it seems to me.
Have u ever watched a race, or a boxing match ?

A trial jury is supposed to reach a verdict
after watching n listening to something a lot like a debate,
tho the trial counsel do not get paid to compromise during argument,
without their clients' consent.

Here we are debating debating.

I have found A2K to be a fun around the clock debating forum,
as long as u can find an advocate on-line to argue with, like tug-of-war:
u need at least 1 guy on each side of the rope.
( In the 1960s, I had 2 purebred puppies: a German Shepherd
and an Irish Setter. I used to watch them sua sponte,
pick up a rope and play tug-of-war with it. )

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I agree that is possible to hold opposing viewpoints, discuss them, and even if you don't change your mind you can gain a much better understanding of why the other has come to hold their belief and respect it.

Some people love those Survivor shows, me I'd rather have a root canal than watch them. I'm not going to insist others stop, I only want to be free of watching it myself. I don't know Brandon either, just observe his behaviour. I don't think it's possible to have a meeting of the minds with him, but that's just my opinion. You and I often disagree, your assumptions regarding my beliefs sometimes leave me scratching my head. However, you and I manage to agree from time to time, which to me means it possible for us to have a meeting of the minds. So, if you enjoy engaging with Brandon I'm perfectly fine with that. You find it interesting and that's terrific. I see him as intentionally obstinate, so I have a much better time not engaging him.

1 Reply

ERRATUM:
"freedom of abortion can be debated
be someone from Planned Parenthood and a fanatical Catholic"

shud have been:

freedom of abortion can be debated
by someone from Planned Parenthood and a fanatical Catholic

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

I was born in NYC. Where are u from ?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I was born in Baltimore, Maryland but went to Iceland with my parents at 8 months. When we returned to the States, we stayed with my grandparents until our house was build in Anne Arundel County. My carreer path bounced me between Ft. Meade and D.C. and Langley. I held assignments in Eastern Europe prior to the lifting of the Iron Curtain. We have lived in Annapolis since 1979, however, many Federal employees, active and retired Military live in this area again in large part because employment opportunities make this area an easy commute. Basically, most people who live here were all born somewhere else. We also have many foreign born neighbors who work at their Governments' Embassies in D.C.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

U 've had an interesting career. Thank u for your service.

I inquired because of your spelling; I wondered if u were
from England or Canada.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

The spelling is due to the fact that the US shares intell with Canada and Great Britain, and they share with us as well. So it's not unusual to see British spelling and after many many years, reading each others reports that are shared in accordance with legal agreement many of us adapt or acquire those differences unconsciously. Sorry, it's not meant to be an affectation. I never spell color as colour or labor as labour but I doubt if I notice it while reading.

Austrailia and New Zealand also have similar partnerships with the US, I just didn't have as much contact with those partners, but I did know a few who did.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Understood.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
It most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates...

Brandon9000 wrote:
Are you saying that it might be a democracy in some way and that we just can't see it?

Yup.

In what sense is China a democracy?

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.

Was the United States a democracy before women gained the right to vote? Were the first "democracies" in Greece...that had very limited suffrage...democracies?

You are arbitrarily limiting things here, Brandon.

I much prefer our ideas of democracy to what others now and in the past have defined as democracies...but I am not willing to limit as much as you.

Under any circumstances, I will not accept the notion that the only "valid" governments are democratic governments.

The United States was a partial democracy before women gained the right to vote. Now it is a full democracy, unless you want to complain about some felons not voting. This is in sharp contrast with China in which the ordinary people do not get to choose their federal office holders at all. Please let me know the sense in which China is a democracy.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.

We don't. (And actually democracy isn't defined by that.)

What about the Bundestag? don't you vote for them? Anyway, Merriam Webster's primary definition for democracy is:

: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting

: a country ruled by democracy

: an organization or situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights

at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

The first of these is exactly what I said. If I am wrong, then please tell me what your definition of democracy is.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

What about the Bundestag? don't you vote for them?

We vote the Bundestag, got even two votes for it.
But this parliament elects the chancellor. And the chancellor nominates the other members of his/her government.
The normal citizen has no chance at all to vote who is a member of this government.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
What about the Bundestag? don't you vote for them?

We vote the Bundestag, got even two votes for it.
But this parliament elects the chancellor. And the chancellor nominates the other members of his/her government.
The normal citizen has no chance at all to vote who is a member of this government.

Aren't the Bundestag part of your government? Anyway, even if you just vote for the guy who votes for the guy, it's a lot more than the ordinary Chinese citizen has. They also are often punished for disagreeing publicly with their government, sometimes even killed as in Tiananmen Square when students demonstrated for democracy.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Aren't the Bundestag part of your government?

No. The Bundestag is the parliament with parties, where governmental ministers are from and the opposition parties.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Anyway, even if you just vote for the guy who votes for the guy, it's a lot more than the ordinary Chinese citizen has.

I don't doubt that at all. But I was responding to your quote below

Brandon9000 wrote:

I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Aren't the Bundestag part of your government?

No. The Bundestag is the parliament with parties, where governmental ministers are from and the opposition parties.

Website of the German Federal Government

Homepage of the German Bundestag and the second chamber Bundesrat (where the states ["Länder"] governments [sic!] are represented).

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Aren't the Bundestag part of your government?

No. The Bundestag is the parliament with parties, where governmental ministers are from and the opposition parties.

Website of the German Federal Government

Homepage of the German Bundestag and the second chamber Bundesrat (where the states ["Länder"] governments [sic!] are represented).

And the parliament isn't part of your government? The Congress is part of ours.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

And the parliament isn't part of your government? The Congress is part of ours.

The parliament isn't part of the government - I'd thought that those websites clearly named it. (That's regulated in our constitution, the 'Basic Law': Article 62: The Federal Government shall consist of the Federal Chancellor and the Federal Ministers.)

And I think that you just look at the situation in your country, think that it must be elsewhere and don't know that things work differently in the worls.

Last week,for instance, was the Queen's speech: the Queen read a prepared speech to members of "Her Majesty's Parliament", outlining "Her Majesty's Government's" politics ...

1 Reply

China Has an Invalid Government

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know