(no subject)

[andrewducker]

Can anyone out there point me at a suggested solution to the Iraq situation that doesn't involve war?

Oh, by solution I mean something that ends up with democracy in Iraq.

Comments

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

When democracy in one of the most civilised countries in the world does not give the populace the right to vote on whether or not to go to war, why inflict the same system on other cultures?

I don't think having/not having democracy is a reason to invade another country.

(This does not imply that I don't think Saddam should be removed, just that democracy isn't the reason or the answer).

[andrewducker]

Being a democracy does not mean being able to vote on every issue. I wouldn't be in favour of that kind of democracy at all. We (and the US) has representative democracy, where we vote for people to make the decisions for us. Theoretically this means that they can dedicate themselves to getting the work done. In practice....

And no, democracy along isn't worth it. But I suspect democracy will lead on from any potential freedom in Iraq.

[wordofblake.livejournal.com]

I've never understood what was so great about democracy. Like you said the descisions are made by few people anyway. Yes you can vote them out, eventually. But replacing them with something nigh indistinguisable. Even that relies on the majority of people doing something sensible.

whelks chance in a supernova if you ask me.

Democracy would work if everyone was smart, educated and involved.

A Meritocracy is the way to go.

[andrewducker]

Aah - but which merit? And who gets to choose it?

Re:

[wordofblake.livejournal.com]

well me obviously...

I'd be happy with a merit

or, even better, your social status goes up with any merit, and the more merits the higher you go