What is a democracy - exchanges with Mike Averko and other participants of his ...

Austria now has a preserved, complete, turn-key nuclear power plant - huge and scary looking thing - that never worked a day and cost 2.5 billion dollars to build in late 60s and early 70s money."which Russians use as a reference, is not “centuries old” as Russians believe, but has been active for only about 40 years"

What Russians believe in that sort of nonsense? Where did you find them? I didn't finish reading the rest of this interesting missive but will do so in a few minutes (I must go feed my daughter) - what is this democracy anyway, some sort of religion? With Washington being the new Vatican.

But wait here, - while the USA is not and has never been democratic in its unfortunately too long a history let me give you how I define democracy - four fundamental criteria of democracy, rule of the people, some borrowed from Karl Popper and some are pretty obvious.

1) Consent of the governed. Government acts strictly with consent of the governed population. It does not invent things or introduce measures unless they are explicitly approved by those whom they affect. Putin's satraps sometimes refer to measure they opponents proposed as "populist" - needless to say that in a democracy the government must be the supreme populist.
2) Right and physical ability of the people to enact measures, through referenda or otherwise, which while expressing popular at large may go contrary to the wishes of the propertied and political classes or minorities, i.e. where will of the people is absolute and has no checks or balances imposed on it. For example, a referendum to exterminate Jews (in the USA) or Chechens in Russia. Sounds horrible but that's something I believe that people must be able to do since democracy presumes that the ruler, the last arbiter of life and death, are the people. I took a political science class at the URI - not finished, I was pretty much given failure for criticizing the jolly state of Israel (in some minor way) - and later listen through a few other American courses which always stipulated that a modern liberal democracy must have protection for minorities (say for red haired people). I agree that to be the case but that would also mean that a democracy here is conditional. I wouldn't want to live under a crowd rule and would prefer enlightened despot any time of the day. On the other hand if you talk about democracy, it must still comply with the rule of the people rule (that came to either too elegant or to too awkward a sentence). Which countries now come close to the ideal of ideal democracy - Switzerland for one (the minaret vote), Denmark, probably Finland in some respects, Holland (note that two of those randomly chosen countries and states are monarchies, hence a monarchy can be a democracy while a republic can be a despotism even it labels itself democratic - like the United States of America - or funnily enough has the word democratic incorporated in its name - like the late German Democratic Republic which likewise was not a democracy as I understand the term).
3) Right of people and factual ability to do so, under stress and even under any national emergency situation, directly and without aid of any parliament or intermediaries to physically replace any official at any time or reverse any official decision no matter how expensive the change might be (an example for is when the Austrian stopped a completed nuclear power plant, Kernkraftwerk Zwentendorf, through a random referendum right before it went to operation. Austria now has a preserved, complete, turn-key nuclear power plant - huge and scary looking thing - that never worked a day and cost 2.5 billion dollars to build in late 60s and early 70s money. They also forced the government together with the prime minister, Bruno Kreisky, I think out of office.
4) Fundamental right and factual ability to replace government in entirety - in its structure, its form, its institutions peacefully.

"However, Medvedev is making a very common mistake in his assertion that Russia did not have democratic practices under the tsars"
Because Medvedev is a Soviet person, a veritable homo sovieticus like his dwarfish benefactor but unlike the latter he is also not bright and has to repeat whatever cliches he is told to by his superiors.


Mike Averko's text I was responding to follows


> >From most recent http://www.russiaprofile.>org panel, last panelist. You don't get this knowledge by strictly relying on a formal Western academic education. To a certain extent, Russia's pre-1917 past has been ideologically crapped on.
>
> As a preamble, one must note that the Western democratic system currently in place, which Russians use as a reference, is not “centuries old” as Russians believe, but has been active for only about 40 years. Women received the right to vote in some Swiss cantons only in the 1970s (in the Grand Duchy of Finland of the Russian Empire, women had the vote in 1906 – 12 years before the United States.) So when Russians plead how “young” their democracy is when compared to other countries, they are misguided. Regarding elections of local officials, one should first fully describe the process in Russia. The political party with the majority of votes in the region’s latest elections proposes three candidates to the president, who selects one of these candidates for approval by the regional legislature. Evidently, the process operates by consensus and the legislature probably has a majority of deputies from the party that made the nomination – therefore the selected candidate is accepted. What is relevant, however, is that the regional legislature has the constitutional right to reject the candidate proposed by the president. It remains to be proven how the above process is “less democratic” than the direct election of a regional official in an election with 30 percent participation by the electorate – an approval of 15 percent of the electorate? (a 50 percent majority of the 30 percent who voted). In France, whose democratic status no one questions, the first direct elections of regional councils occurred in March of 1986. Until 1982, the prefects of France’s departements were appointed centrally. To the best of our knowledge, France was fully democratic in 1981. However, Medvedev is making a very common mistake in his assertion that Russia did not have democratic practices under the tsars. This is more remarkable in a man with a sharp mind, an advanced degree in jurisprudence and an avowed reader of Vasily Klyuchevsky, which suggests a better than passing knowledge of Russian history. Russia’s democratic tradition extends from the veches (citizen assemblies) of Novgorod and Kiev (9th and10th centuries) to legal contracts (kinds of minor versions of the Magna Charta) between medieval Russian regions and the princes they hired to govern. Tsar Ivan the Terrible introduced a regional elected government in lieu of voyevodas (governors) appointed from Moscow and in 1550 convened an elected legislative Congress of the Realm. The famous Kuzma Minin of Nizhniy Novgorod in 1611 was an elected city official. The first Romanov Tsar, Michael Fyodorovich, was selected in 1613 by a generally elected Congress of the Realm (Zemskiy Sobor) and then ratified by a national referendum. In 1649 another generally elected legislative congress updated Russia’s Code of Laws. Peter the Great introduced self-government to the various estates of Russian society (the sosloviya): merchants, city dwellers, the gentry, Cossacks and the roughly 50 percent of Russian peasants who were never serfs. Catherine the Great convoked elected deputies of a Council of the Realm (this Parliament failed due to its own ineptitude.) The concept of the State Duma was formulated under Alexander I. Nicholas I upgraded self-governance among the 50 percent of Russian peasants who were not serfs, and his son Alexander II introduced extensive self-government reforms in 1860 to 1870. By 1914 Russia’s State Duma had representatives from 14 political parties. The real issue for modern Russia is that Soviet rule purposefully erased Russian democratic traditions, which had accumulated over centuries. Soviet political censorship eradicated social memory about self-rule – so the president of Russia is in one sense correct when he claims Russian democracy to be “young” – Russians are “discovering” what their grandparents were forced to forget. History can and must be reclaimed in Russia.




А так же :

Фишдом H2O. Подводная Одиссея


Мифология древних славян
Славяне отделились от индоевропейского языкового массива во II тысячелетии до нашей эры. Их верования уходят корнями в воззрения древних индоевропейцев, благодаря чему во взглядах древних славян мы находим множество общих черт с мифологическими системами Индии, древних германцев, кельтов, греков и римлян.


ИСК!!!


Клещевина обыкновенная
Ricinus communis L. Название рода от латинизированного греческого “zikinos” — наименование растения или от древнегреческого “zikaz” — округлый; латинское communis — обыкновенный. Клещевину знали еще в Древнем Египте, где в VII в. до н.э. она уже возделывалась как культурное растение по берегам рек и прудов, в долине Нила (семена клещевины были найдены в гробницах, относящихся к этому периоду).


Kstati I foti vilogila s Seoul Grand Parka http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/happy_moments/


rencontres arabie saoudite



Hosted by uCoz