Limits of democracy

[mdsimpson92]

I have been thinking about this. As much as we in the West give so much emphasis on the idea of the rights of the people and of the virtues of free society, I am not entirely sure it is for everyone. More specifically, after seeing the Arab Spring's results and spending so much time in China, I wonder if a culture has to develop in a certain way in order for that to work in a healthy manner. The more I think about it, the more scared I am if a country like China were to become democratic, particularly because of the nationalistic tendencies here, the lack of critical thinking emphasized when dealing with things like politics(this is not just due to the government, it is their education style that has been here for thousands of years), and the fact that it would be VERY easy to abuse (like in low level local elections).

Thoughts? (also talking about learning styles here is an interesting topic in of itself).

[Metacrock]

I have been thinking about this. As much as we in the West give so much emphasis on the idea of the rights of the people and of the virtues of free society, I am not entirely sure it is for everyone. More specifically, after seeing the Arab Spring's results and spending so much time in China, I wonder if a culture has to develop in a certain way in order for that to work in a healthy manner. The more I think about it, the more scared I am if a country like China were to become democratic, particularly because of the nationalistic tendencies here, the lack of critical thinking emphasized when dealing with things like politics(this is not just due to the government, it is their education style that has been here for thousands of years), and the fact that it would be VERY easy to abuse (like in low level local elections).

Thoughts? (also talking about learning styles here is an interesting topic in of itself).

Democracy presupposes an educated citizenry who are capable of using critcial thinking. We take for granted that this will all follow in the wake of democratic elections but it wont. We in America think it did becuase that's sort of how it did for us, although we are not really aware of the fact that it didn't because we are still not very analytical. It didn't happen that way for Europe either. First came the interest in ideas and the enlightenment and then the French revolution, which saw the unwashed masses hankering to cut off heads. Then came education, after the pile of bodies.

The sanitized civics class version of things assumes an educated citizenry goes to the polls and votes in the best person for the job because the educated voters thought about it. That's less and less the case, if it ever was. To the extent that it was (which may not be much) it only came after the pile of bodies and a lot of struggle.

Marxist revolution is intellectual. not that all Marxists are scholars but it always is accompanied by a bunch of talk about ideas because that's the form Marx put it in. Marxist revolutionaries might include illiterate hill people in Laos but they are still quoting stuff they have heard about the bourgeoisie and so on.

[fleetmouse]

Dear Dr. Chomsky,

Some of the chaps at school and I were discussing world politics and we wondered about your opinion on the situation in The Orient.

As you know, the Darkfellows with their heathen superstitions and the inscrutable Chinee are ill bred for the exercise of personal liberty, unlike we Europeans who transitioned from lusty barbarism to sophisticated gentility bloodlessly and virtually overnight. We thought it might be better to install friendly strongmen in those faraway lands, the better to put them to productive use exporting raw materials and commodities, rather than letting the rabble take over and ruin the place and who knows what you'll end up with then!

Grateful for any light you can shed on these serious matters.

Chin Chin,

"Kip" Worthington

[fleetmouse]

(I'm teasing, Miles, I don't think you're "that guy", I'm just feeling impish)

[mdsimpson92]

I have been thinking about this. As much as we in the West give so much emphasis on the idea of the rights of the people and of the virtues of free society, I am not entirely sure it is for everyone. More specifically, after seeing the Arab Spring's results and spending so much time in China, I wonder if a culture has to develop in a certain way in order for that to work in a healthy manner. The more I think about it, the more scared I am if a country like China were to become democratic, particularly because of the nationalistic tendencies here, the lack of critical thinking emphasized when dealing with things like politics(this is not just due to the government, it is their education style that has been here for thousands of years), and the fact that it would be VERY easy to abuse (like in low level local elections).

Thoughts? (also talking about learning styles here is an interesting topic in of itself).

Democracy presupposes an educated citizenry who are capable of using critcial thinking. We take for granted that this will all follow in the wake of democratic elections but it wont. We in America think it did becuase that's sort of how it did for us, although we are not really aware of the fact that it didn't because we are still not very analytical. It didn't happen that way for Europe either. First came the interest in ideas and the enlightenment and then the French revolution, which saw the unwashed masses hankering to cut off heads. Then came education, after the pile of bodies.

The sanitized civics class version of things assumes an educated citizenry goes to the polls and votes in the best person for the job because the educated voters thought about it. That's less and less the case, if it ever was. To the extent that it was (which may not be much) it only came after the pile of bodies and a lot of struggle.

Marxist revolution is intellectual. not that all Marxists are scholars but it always is accompanied by a bunch of talk about ideas because that's the form Marx put it in. Marxist revolutionaries might include illiterate hill people in Laos but they are still quoting stuff they have heard about the bourgeoisie and so on.

Actually, Chinese education since Confucius has never really focused on critical thinking. It was always the general memorization of the classics, that was held up more than anything. Hell, their own language gives more emphasis on memorization than anything else. Their education system here pretty much ignores critical thinking and analysis. I don't want to sound culturally posturing, but I have talked with this British guy who has lived here for 3-4 years(you would like him fleet, smart, atheist, snarky, but polite) and that is how they really think and learn, they don't really learn to have an opinion, to the annoyance of an american friend of mine who teaches at Nankai(you would like him meta, smart, religious, liberal, but southern)

[mdsimpson92]

(I'm teasing, Miles, I don't think you're "that guy", I'm just feeling impish)

You're snarky enough, but I don't think you're short enough for the title of Imp, that belongs to Tyrion Lannister.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... a05nLZSFCg

[mdsimpson92]

Anyone else want to talk about this, are there periods of development where authoritarianism can be justified as a part of development?

[Metacrock]

Dear Dr. Chomsky,

Some of the chaps at school and I were discussing world politics and we wondered about your opinion on the situation in The Orient.

As you know, the Darkfellows with their heathen superstitions and the inscrutable Chinee are ill bred for the exercise of personal liberty, unlike we Europeans who transitioned from lusty barbarism to sophisticated gentility bloodlessly and virtually overnight. We thought it might be better to install friendly strongmen in those faraway lands, the better to put them to productive use exporting raw materials and commodities, rather than letting the rabble take over and ruin the place and who knows what you'll end up with then!

Grateful for any light you can shed on these serious matters.

Chin Chin,

"Kip" Worthington

ahahahahahahaahahahaha!!!!

I'm spitting milk through my nose.

[Metacrock]

I have been thinking about this. As much as we in the West give so much emphasis on the idea of the rights of the people and of the virtues of free society, I am not entirely sure it is for everyone. More specifically, after seeing the Arab Spring's results and spending so much time in China, I wonder if a culture has to develop in a certain way in order for that to work in a healthy manner. The more I think about it, the more scared I am if a country like China were to become democratic, particularly because of the nationalistic tendencies here, the lack of critical thinking emphasized when dealing with things like politics(this is not just due to the government, it is their education style that has been here for thousands of years), and the fact that it would be VERY easy to abuse (like in low level local elections).

Thoughts? (also talking about learning styles here is an interesting topic in of itself).

Democracy presupposes an educated citizenry who are capable of using critcial thinking. We take for granted that this will all follow in the wake of democratic elections but it wont. We in America think it did becuase that's sort of how it did for us, although we are not really aware of the fact that it didn't because we are still not very analytical. It didn't happen that way for Europe either. First came the interest in ideas and the enlightenment and then the French revolution, which saw the unwashed masses hankering to cut off heads. Then came education, after the pile of bodies.

The sanitized civics class version of things assumes an educated citizenry goes to the polls and votes in the best person for the job because the educated voters thought about it. That's less and less the case, if it ever was. To the extent that it was (which may not be much) it only came after the pile of bodies and a lot of struggle.

Marxist revolution is intellectual. not that all Marxists are scholars but it always is accompanied by a bunch of talk about ideas because that's the form Marx put it in. Marxist revolutionaries might include illiterate hill people in Laos but they are still quoting stuff they have heard about the bourgeoisie and so on.

Actually, Chinese education since Confucius has never really focused on critical thinking. It was always the general memorization of the classics, that was held up more than anything. Hell, their own language gives more emphasis on memorization than anything else. Their education system here pretty much ignores critical thinking and analysis. I don't want to sound culturally posturing, but I have talked with this British guy who has lived here for 3-4 years(you would like him fleet, smart, atheist, snarky, but polite) and that is how they really think and learn, they don't really learn to have an opinion, to the annoyance of an american friend of mine who teaches at Nankai(you would like him meta, smart, religious, liberal, but southern)

that reminds of a martial arts movie I saw once, I am not sure if it was Hong kong made or Taiwan. It was called Ti Chi III and it had turn of the century(19th->20) kids being taught by Ti Chi master by the method tying their pigtails to pipes in the ceiling so they couldn't turn their heads away form the book, and thus forcing them to memorize Confucius.

Then when they got the chance to fight they were kick ass Ti Chi guys. For those who don't know Ti chi is a martial art. It's not just slow exercises.

[Metacrock]

Anyone else want to talk about this, are there periods of development where authoritarianism can be justified as a part of development?

Sure, like when the party issues a new party line. Or when the workers hold a hearing among the soviets to decide if a comrade has been a traitor.