- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 799 Hour
- Reading permission
This post was edited by ExileMick at 2014-5-10 17:38|
S'rotide.Kcip Post time: 2014-5-8 19:55
Your post is illogical: you don't understand the definition of a slave versus democratic rule. A s ...
'while in a democracy, a person can vote on what to do.'
Oh, you poor, deluded and brainwashed child. Yes, you can vote. Yes, you can listen to the politician's promises of sweeping away the idiots who govern you now and replacing them with super smart people who not only know what's best for you but will give you the wonderful land and future that your forefathers fought for.
Then, they are elected and the fantastic promises disappear. They are forgotten as the reality of the situation hits home and your new government does almost exactly the same as their predecessors.
You and all the others in the west follow the illusion of democracy. You believe that you and your vote can make a difference but can it really? Aren't you just replacing one set of idiots spouting empty promises with another? Even if it does make a minute difference, are you and the electorate really that well qualified to decide how a country should be run? Didn't your (elected) government allow the banks to cause an almost total collapse of the monetary system just a few years ago? Didn't Spain, Ireland et al need to borrow billions to stave off financial ruin and aren't you, the working man, still paying for that? What's that you say? It wasn't the government's fault, it was the banks? Oh, thank you for making me smile. It is the government which sets the framework within which the banks are allowed to operate. The government that was elected by, er, you!
Does it really matter whether people can vote or not? Which is more important, to have a vote or to have a government that is good for the country? The west lurches from one crisis to the next. Governments are voted in then out again as people exercise their right to substitute those have failed with those who will fail later. Western governments change almost with every election. New laws are written, new and old ways are replaced with others but with little difference in the end result. It is like the weather in Britain; there may be some sunshine occasionally but, for now, we have to put up with the rain. China, on the other hand, has a system where one party leads the country to greater wealth for all. Standards of living across the country are rising, millionaires become billionaires, more people own their homes, cars etc than ever before. Entrepreneurship is encouraged, small businesses are started and become bigger. More people are involved in the country's success and China grows stronger by the day while the west scrabbles around in the gutter hoping for a few scraps to fall from Uncle Sam's increasingly tired table.
As already stated, many elected governments in the west needed to borrow billions to avoid a financial meltdown. The USA itself prints more money that it can't validate and is in hock up to its eyeballs to, er, China! China is quietly laughing all the way to the bank.
So, which system is better for the country? Democracy, a circus of regularly changing idiots or China's one party leading it to assume its rightful position in the world?