Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Guided Democracy - Covered Dictatorships


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, hot enough said:

I'm certain that there will be many who will leap to the fore to research and discuss that, given that these folks live in such open, honest societies where wholesome debate is their lifeblood.

LoL, stop pouring gasoline on the fire :lol: Look what I remember, there was a Turkish person who was quite interested to research these things, he had visited Vatican many times and he was about to be assassinated in Turkiye and he was escaped to Switzerland and assassinated there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Altai said:

I am interested to learn more about the political power of Pope. I have read somewhere that the current one or previous one was a member of Nazi organizations in his youth. 

Perhaps you should have done that research BEFORE drawing your conclusions.  That usually helps.  But to fulfill your desire to know more about the political power of the Pope, I might be able to help there, since I'm Catholic and have done a little reading on the subject of how the Vatican works.  It was the previous pope, Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) who was in the Hitler Youth in his youth.  You couldn't get out of it, though.  Try to get out of the Hitler youth and you end up in deep trouble in National Socialist Germany.  At one point I think every young male was enrolled in it upon reaching a certain age.  So I can't hold that against Pope Benedict.

 

1 hour ago, hot enough said:

You are being deceptive or much worse. 

Oh, excuse me.  I'll try to avoid that in the future.  My bad.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Perhaps you should have done that research BEFORE drawing your flawed conclusions.

 

Oh, excuse me.


Excuse me ? You could not reply my question and now you call my questioning as "flawed". I also didnt made a conclusion, I am just asking questions and you cant reply them. 

Making post which has no affect to develope conversation further is forbidden according to the forum guidelines and you are violating it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Altai said:


Excuse me ? You could not reply my question and now you call my questioning as "flawed". I also didnt made a conclusion, I am just asking questions and you cant reply them. 

Making post which has no affect to develope conversation further is forbidden according to the forum guidelines and you are violating it. 

What? I don't understand you now.  What was your actual question, then? I was responding to your statements.  I thought that it is a flawed argument to draw a conclusion before finding out the facts.  Is that not logical?

I was saying "excuse me" to hotenough, not to you Altai.  Hot enough was accusing me of deception, so I responded with a degree of polite levity.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the Catholic Church, and the power of the Pope, it is related to the fact that he is the spiritual leader of 1.5 billion Catholics worldwide.  The Vatican City-State is also a sovereign country, a political entity designed so as to enclose and protect the "Holy See" (a term which is kind of ephemeral in a way).  So he's the head of state of a tiny city state, and the diplomatic power of the Holy See is used to protect and promote the interests of Catholics worldwide.  Does that help?

I can give you more information, but where specifically would you like me to begin? It's hard to describe someone's power, since power is an ephemeral thing.  Whole books have been written about the Pope/Vatican/Catholic Church/Holy See (whatever one cares to call it).

My apologies if I sounded sarcastic above.  That was inappropriate of me.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said:

As for the Catholic Church, and the power of the Pope, it is related to the fact that he is the spiritual leader of 1.5 billion Catholics worldwide.  The Vatican City-State is also a sovereign country, a political entity designed so as to enclose and protect the "Holy See" (a term which is kind of ephemeral in a way).  So he's the head of state of a tiny city state, and the diplomatic power of the Holy See is used to protect and promote the interests of Catholics worldwide.  Does that help?

I can give you more information, but where specifically would you like me to begin? It's hard to describe someone's power, since power is an ephemeral thing.  Whole books have been written about the Pope/Vatican/Catholic Church/Holy See (whatever one cares to call it).

My apologies if I sounded sarcastic above.  That was inappropriate of me.


Yes he is a religious figure and respected person by billion of people but he have been in a meeting which is related with political and financial relationships of countries and he also poses in front of the country leaders giving a perception that he has a power on them. He also give advices to them, you can find the full article in Vatican website. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a part from his speech given to the statesmen;

"The founding fathers remind us that Europe is not a conglomeration of rules to obey, or a manual of protocols and procedures to follow. It is a way of life, a way of understanding man based on his transcendent and inalienable dignity, as something more than simply a sum of rights to defend or claims to advance. At the origin of the idea of Europe, we find “the nature and the responsibility of the human person, with his ferment of evangelical fraternity…, with his desire for truth and justice, honed by a thousand-year-old experience”.[3] Rome, with its vocation to universality,[4] symbolizes that experience and was thus chosen as the place for the signing of the Treaties. For here – as the Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs, J. Luns, observed – “were laid the political, juridical and social foundations of our civilization”

Full article >>> http://bit.ly/2pkfXWA



Seem like, he is openly and clearly have an affect on EU governments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting.  The Catholic Church has had enormous influence over Italy, I know.  It might still.  However, there's nothing wrong with having a photo op with the pope and getting "advice" from him.  John Paul II chewed out George W Bush over the Iraq War, yet that didn't cause us to reverse our policy.  Even Catholic-dominated democracies, particularly in Europe, are secular enough these days that the Church can't just tell a president or prime minister what to do.  They may show the Holy Father respect especially if they are Catholic and in a Catholic-majority country, but that doesn't mean they really give a damn what he thinks.  They will politely listen to his advice and do what they please.  Don't forget that it was only a couple centuries ago the French were arresting priests and bishops and sending them to guillotine.  Since then, France and other Catholic countries of Europe have cut back the church's influence drastically and "secularized" their governments.

Rome was probably chosen for the site of the treaties, not because it is a suburb of the Vatican, but because of its symbolic location as the capital of the Roman Empire--the last time those European peoples were united under one roof was under Roman rule (before the Catholic Church existed).  So it's pretty symbolic to sign your united Europe treaty in the city that was the last capital under which Europe was united, eh?

Don't forget, a lot of countries in the EU do not contain Catholic majorities, or even significant minorities, necessarily.  UK, Netherlands, Germany (though there are plenty of Catholics, the majority are Protestant), Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Greece, many of the former Eastern bloc members.  And Turkey.

Let me try to see clearly what you're thinking.  It seems that you believe a democracy shouldn't be influenced or ruled by elites, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎04‎-‎15 at 6:44 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

As for the Catholic Church, and the power of the Pope, it is related to the fact that he is the spiritual leader of 1.5 billion Catholics worldwide.  The Vatican City-State is also a sovereign country, a political entity designed so as to enclose and protect the "Holy See" (a term which is kind of ephemeral in a way).  So he's the head of state of a tiny city state, and the diplomatic power of the Holy See is used to protect and promote the interests of Catholics worldwide.  Does that help?

I can give you more information, but where specifically would you like me to begin? It's hard to describe someone's power, since power is an ephemeral thing.  Whole books have been written about the Pope/Vatican/Catholic Church/Holy See (whatever one cares to call it).

My apologies if I sounded sarcastic above.  That was inappropriate of me.

Lol Mr. Hacker he's probably still working on the word "ephemeral" and lol, your sarcasm is quite appropriate but hey what do I know. I was just reading this silly thread back and enjoyed your William F. Buckley  responses to the scruff. (how's that for elitist talk).

Elitism is an interesting concept. Some define it by the amount of money one has, others by the power they have, others by  their access to certain information  or persons, others base it on inherited blood lines or the schools they have gone to. For me elitism that comes from being a superior artist or athlete I can handle. I admire both types. I have no problem with that. Elitism for me if its based on merit I believe is an essential part of democracy. If its based on corruption well of course it  might be  coercive and destructive element to democracy. Call me old fashioned but elitism based on merit  for me is nothing to be frightened or envious of...I think its something o be admired. Democracies need role models. I guess its all in how we define elitism. I think today many use it to describe anyone they are envious of.

I always found for example when I was in school the Marxists would always talk about the elite when it came to the West but pretended it did not exist in the Stalinist-Maoist empires. You could not get more elite than the communist party apparatus.

I guess the most well known elites were royalty and the US was created to rebel against that system but I think its safe to say elitism in the US was based on those who accumulated power through control of material production, i.e., the great industrialists. I wonder sometimes,, how could you build a society without elitists? Isn't it inherent in them to lead and innovate and is that such a bad thing? I think the word "elite" is too often used in a negative sense to describe rich white men. I met a rich white guy once but he was not an elitist, just a hard working guy.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 6:46 PM, Rue said:

I guess the most well known elites were royalty and the US was created to rebel against that system but I think its safe to say elitism in the US was based on those who accumulated power through control of material production, i.e., the great industrialists. I wonder sometimes,, how could you build a society without elitists? Isn't it inherent in them to lead and innovate and is that such a bad thing? I think the word "elite" is too often used in a negative sense to describe rich white men. I met a rich white guy once but he was not an elitist, just a hard working guy.

I think the US founded a system of elitism through a meritocracy.  As such, George Washington was made elitist through his achievements: a military leader, founder of the first constitutional democracy and the richest man in the USA at that time.  

Human beings need leaders, and I think we should be forging the very natural idea that elites in any arena are "leaders", and as such should hold our attention, our admiration, and our criticism.  This is how a group works - the leader will hold a position at the pinnacle based on our common values and will live in the sphere of that discussion.   Admiration and criticism will be directed at said leader with respect to our common values.

Big problems come if there is a near-even split of those values: you effectively end up with warring factions who value different things.  On one side, it could be material achievement, strength, and a zeal to propose major changes, while on the other it could be humanistic inclusion, deference and caution.  I do have an idea, though, that a good leader can also lead the natural trend towards unity of said values.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some examples of unnatural elites, to my mind:

-Wealthy people who are unknown, who hold vast power without public scrutiny

-Athletes and entertainers who excel in highly specialized areas, but are not "whole people" in the public mind or - worse - have manufactured personas that don't reflect who they really are.  Politicians, as a kind of actor, can be downvoted quite easily (eg. Hillary Clinton) if the public doesn't buy their persona

-So-called thought leaders, thinky politicians and academics who have ideas that wouldn't work but play well to their captive crowds

-Pure celebrities who are known by millions but have achieved nothing really (eg. Youtube stars who are famous for being famous)

----------

Mass media is behind the ascendance of a lot of unnatural elites.  We know the persona, and may or may not be fooled by it, but we don't know the real person.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-04-15 at 10:17 AM, Altai said:

Are there any reason for him to stand in the middle and in front of all of them as a president of a state ? The photo was taken during the celebration of the Treaty of Rome. He is the leader of Vatikan, which is a country dependent to Italy on foreing affairs. So there is no reason for him to be there as a statesman, I also cant see the price of Monaco which is also a state but dependent to Spain on foreign affairs. So he is there as a religious figure. Why would a religious figure poses like which would cause "misunderstandings" that he is actually the leader of the European countries ?

Altai,  the Pope is a very influential political figure.  The Vatican is actually a tiny country inside Rome and is completely independent.  But because the Vatican has hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics around the world in many countries, it has a lot of influence and political power.  It is also one of the richest organizations in the world with billions of dollars in wealth (real estate and money). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Right.  It doesn't mean that all of Europe's leaders are the pope's stooges.

So in general, Altai, what are you trying to say about these democracies in question?

I don't think she is being rude. I think she has left the site. At least as Altai.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements



×
×
  • Create New...