Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Altai

Democracy is big nonsense

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, taxme said:

There should be no PM or any other politician in Canada being able to have the power to stall or kill energy projects. On the contrary, the PM and politicians should be there to encourage energy creating projects and the jobs that will be created from those projects. Unless a project was going to have a some kind of detrimental impact on the environment or destroy people's lives in some way then all should be a go. 

Yes.   Just for the record he killed the Northern Gateway Pipeline and used the National Energy Board environmental review process to stop the Energy East Pipeline.  We've yet to see the Trans Mountain Pipeline be built and operational.  His national carbon pricing scheme is forcing provinces to put a high price on carbon and enact carbon taxes as well.  This is another energy industry killing move and will force the cost of living upwards, and may be forcing investment and energy companies to go elsewhere in the world to operate.

Edited by blackbird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, blackbird said:

Yes.   Just for the record he killed the Northern Gateway Pipeline and used the National Energy Board environmental review process to stop the Energy East Pipeline.  We've yet to see the Trans Mountain Pipeline be built and operational.  His national carbon pricing scheme is forcing provinces to put a high price on carbon and enact carbon taxes as well.  This is another energy industry killing move and will force the cost of living upwards, and may be forcing investment and energy companies to go elsewhere in the world to operate.

The environment, gay/transgender rights, 3rd world immigration, native Indians, and being pro-Islamic seems to be what Trudeau and his merry gang of leftist lieberal buffoons is what Canada is all about today. I would not want to be anyone in Canada trying to open up and trying to operate a business. With so many rules and regulations, high taxes, carbon taxes, environmentalists, native Indians, forced quotas to have to deal with it is a wonder there are still people who are able to start up and operate a business here in Canada.

Canada should be a power house when it comes to creating millions of jobs but instead it would appear as though Canada is anti-business, and having people to depend on the government for their survival seems to be what politicians are all about. Bringing in the hundreds of thousands of 3rd world immigrants that will not really offer much in the way of creating jobs except maybe for themselves and their family members only also. Would you go work for one of these new immigrants if they were able to open up a small business? I doubt that you would. The working conditions would be terrible. If we had real pro business political leaders and more entrepreneurs in the government and less school teachers and environmentalists and pro multiculturalists there might not be two million unemployed Canadians in Canada today. Just saying. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2017 at 9:27 PM, Altai said:


I dont know, maybe a software. So we could write a software and distribute it to every citizens to prevent any kind of abuse and distortion. We can update it from time to time. There will still be government and officials but they will just apply the duties given by the software.

Any other ideas ?


Artificial intelligence judge makes 79% accurete decisions on 379 different cases.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/24/artificial-intelligence-judge-university-college-london-computer-scientists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turkiye starts to use artificial intelligence to find terrorists. The software consist of 273 different criterias to determine whether or not a person is a terrorist. The results with 1-2 points are labeled as "should be investigated", results with 2-3 points are labeled as "should be dismissed and investigated", results with 3-4 points are labeled as "a criminal complaint must be filed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 10:43 AM, Altai said:

1-Democracy is a big nonsense because having more votes does not make something right.

2-When we have the same informations, we all will end up with the same logical results.

3-In some aspects of life, for example in politics, there are soo much information and therefore people in general does not bother themselves to reach in deep information and they simply choose the informations which fits with their personal ego to build their perspective.

4-We dont make true or false decides. We are just realizing or missing the logic. Logic is always there, even if we miss or reject to recognize it when it does not fit with our personal interests/ego.

In regards to 1, democracy is the fundamental principle of having the majority of peoples' opinions considered. It does not mean in democracies, laws are only based on majority rule and nothing else as your comment necessarily concludes and assumes. Therefire the comment is illogical. If democracy was only based on majority role and no other criteria it would create chaos and not be able to continue functioning.

In regards to comment 2, people often are given identical information and conclude different things from it. This is why we have legal disputes and court actions, political debate, conflict.  Again the writer assumes people automatically think the same when they are given the same information. This is her subjective assumption. People's perception of the same information is not necessarily the same otherwise there would be no conflict. To say it is as she has done is therefore absurd,  illogical and contradicts the most basic of human behaviour patterns, conflicting opinions based on the same information given to them.

In regards to the third incoherent statement above, the writer again makes assumptions and generalizations based on subjective speculation. Like" her" other 2 comments "she" has no objective basis, statistics or information to base her conclusions. Her comments make no sense if for no other reason, people may not bother to consider"all the facts" as "she" states, because there may be too many to consider and they become overwhelming to consider , but also because the relevant facts may never have been disclosed, only certain facts were disclosed to prevent a full analysis to be able to offer an accurate analysis from which to conclude anything  or because only immaterial facts were disclosed or because  the subject matter was too complex for the audience or beyond their  intellectual or academic levels perception to understand. A classic example of that is the writer not being able to understand what I just wrote. Again the writer fails to consider other possibilities and makes a sweeping assumption there is only one  possibility and that is her possibility and she has nothing to  back up her conclusion.

In regards to the 4th comment, she again makes an incoherent and absurd comment. She first assumes nothing we conclude is true or false which inherently makes no sense when common sense alone would dictate sometimes are beliefs and conclusions are verifiable based on objective methodology and therefore accurate and sometimes are not verifiable or measurable and therefore inaccurate or reliable to base a conclusion because they rely on unverifiable subjective assumptions.

She also fails to consider sometimes we may be right and wrong but "right" and "wrong" is a fluid subjective definition the way she uses it. In her world "right" is the conclusion she agrees with, I would suggest in the real world "right" and "wrong" are moral judgements and she interposes them with conclusions and assumes her moral judgements are absolute truths which is illogical.

She also makes the ridiculous comment that logic is always there. Not with her. She demonstrates her entire world is based on what she thinks is "right" or "wrong"  when I would suggest her moral conclusions are not universal truths just her subjective beliefs.

I would argue conclusions that are base on verifiable objective methodology are more reliable than her subjective moral beliefs or subjective assumptions. I would argue no one knows truth, at best we think we do and that if we can't prove something with objective methodology its a subjective opinion which is necessarily limited  and suspectyas it isn't based on anything that can be proven.

When studying human behaviour and thought processes and cognitive functioning, we know many human behaviours are arbitrary and irrational and not based on logic (objective methodology) at all but in fact are distorted perceptions that arise due to misinformation, neurological, psychological, psychiatric, physical, spiritual or emotional phenomena interfering with our perceptions and  distorting what we think we see or decipher and therefore what we conclude.

Of course logic does not always exist. In fact it mostly does not exist. We are constantly  challenged to make it exist to make the world we are born into more understandable and civilized.

I would argue the writer, a composite of Islamic fundamentalist extremist thought sources, (sometimes called boys, terrorists, radicals, angry disenfranchised youth unable to assimilate into the Western mosaic))projects and expresses intransigent, inflexible, rigid, limited, closed,  undeveloped, arbitrary, subjective thought patterns that produce absurd assumptions that defy basic common sense. I believe they reflect a lack of ability to engage in critical thought processes and are a result of being conditioned to not question but instead repeat back blindly, dogma from a Mullah and never question it.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2017 at 10:43 AM, Altai said:

Democracy is a big nonsense

having watched what went on at that supposed hearing regarding Kavanaugh.....I think I agree with you.

That's what the Democrats showed to the world!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, betsy said:

having watched what went on at that supposed hearing regarding Kavanaugh.....I think I agree with you.

That's what the Democrats showed to the world!

The Democrats are not nice.  They are hypocritical self serving weasels.  It's just that the Republicans are worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor Kavanaugh. My heart literally bleeds for him. (I think whether anyone believes an accuser during a Supreme Court nomination hearing depends not on morality or truth but whether one is from the same party as the Senate majority or not. Admit it.)

But, TO GET BACK ON TOPIC: In a sense, Altai is right that Democracy is a flawed form of government. Now, I cannot agree with her absolutist stance against it, and I like living in one rather than a country like her's but there are a few problems with democracy. Just off the top of my head:

1. tyranny of the majority. Democracy works by imposing the will of the 50%+1 on the 50%-1. What's good for the majority is not necessarily good for everyone. Also, this does not always guarantee freedom necessarily (hence the word "tyranny"). Why would democracies need to have a bill of rights if freedom was always automatically ensured by elections?

2. information deficit. People don't always know what's good for them. Not only that they don't always have the requisite information they need to make informed choices. Some of this information can't be shared with the public. Also, people don't have the expertise usually to make these informed decisions.

3. voters not careful.  "Joe six-pack" can vote emotionally, rather than rationally, if he/she wants to. Voters are easily swayed by emotional, "feel good" issues, rather than ones which are rational. Politicians in democracies are very adept at using the passions and prejudices of voters to ensure their political survival.

4. political survival. Democracy doesn't eliminate the need of the elected leaders to survive in office. Here, there is little difference between a dictatorship and a democracy, except that the former has different means at his/her disposal than the latter in ensuring that political survival.

However--following the same rubric--lack of democracy has even more question marks against humankind, thusly:

1. tyranny period. Instead of the tyranny of the majority it's a tyranny of one, or a small caste of people.

2. information deficit. This problem is "solved" by making decisions in the dark, which will be even less wise than those made by errant voters.

3. dictators not careful. (see point 2) More likely, they'll make decisions based in the self-interest one of person (him/herself) and the small caste of people around him/her.

4. political survival. Still there, but worse. This time, you can ensure your survival by even more nefarious means, such as rigged elections and coups d'etat.

There are other hallmarks of a solid dictatorship, like disappearing in the middle of the night, and never being heard from again. Limited personal freedoms, corruption, and so on. I'm sorry Altai, but your arguments against democracy are weak. And you cannot run a government by computer, it just doesn't work. Governments have to be run by human beings. If you think AI should make such decisions, I recommend the movie 2001: a Space Odyssey.

Edited by JamesHackerMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Democracy keeps being a nonsense. US agent so-called priest Brunson who were sentenced in Turkiye since last 2 years, have been released after secret talks between Turkish and US officials, shortly before US elections.

Democracy is just an apple candy to keep people silent, all the countries are ruled by specific powers/groups. 

Edited by Altai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agent Brunson prays with Trump in "secular" (so Atheist) and "democratic" US govt. 

 


 

Edited by Altai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2018 at 4:21 AM, Altai said:

Agent Brunson prays with Trump in "secular" (so Atheist) and "democratic" US govt. 

What do you mean by "agent"?   I thought he is a Pastor.
Do you think he was a spy or secret agent?  If so, what proof is there?
 


 

It is a secular government, but there are a lot of Christians in it. 

Edited by blackbird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2018 at 10:14 AM, bcsapper said:

The Democrats are not nice.  They are hypocritical self serving weasels.  It's just that the Republicans are worse.

In what way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

In what way?

Have you been in a coma?  Get well soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2018 at 10:25 AM, Altai said:

Democracy keeps being a nonsense. US agent so-called priest Brunson who were sentenced in Turkiye since last 2 years, have been released after secret talks between Turkish and US officials, shortly before US elections.

Democracy is just an apple candy to keep people silent, all the countries are ruled by specific powers/groups. 

Can you clarify what you mean by your last sentence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today we have seen again how the democracy works. Three American politicians (or three American terrorists, whatever the name you call them with) are threatened by bombs have been sent to them. While you think that everything happens by your votes, the powers squeezes each other's throat behind the scenes. You will think that you are free until you start to disturb the powers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2018 at 6:37 AM, blackbird said:

It is a secular government, but there are a lot of Christians in it. 


LoL nonsense. You are hypocrite people. Can you imagine if it was a Muslim cleric and a Muslim politician and what would be the comments about it ? I really start to hate Western people more and more with each passing day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Altai, your "hate" for Western people has long since shown. If you hate us so much then why do you continue to post here? You're well short on information about us, yet you know that you hate us. Maybe it's time to move on. We tolerate a lot at MLW, differing opinions and so forth, that sometimes make our blood boil. That's part of democratic debate.

But you don't seem to realize that. Again, maybe it's time to find a debate group that agrees with everything you say.

Edited by JamesHackerMP
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2017 at 7:43 AM, Altai said:

Democracy is a big nonsense because having more votes does not make something right. When we have the same informations, we all will end up with the same logical results. In some aspects of life, for example in politics, there are soo much information and therefore people in general does not bother themselves to reach in deep information and they simply choose the informations which fits with their personal ego to build their perspective. This topic is directly related with my another topic "There is nothing to discuss". 

We dont make true or false decides. We are just realizing or missing the logic. Logic is always there, even if we miss or reject to recognize it when it does not fit with our personal interests/ego.

To say that we shouldn't be allowed to vote is to say that the will & the opinions of the electorate (citizens) don't matter. Which is to say that you yourself shouldn't have an opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

To say that we shouldn't be allowed to vote is to say that the will & the opinions of the electorate (citizens) don't matter. Which is to say that you yourself shouldn't have an opinion. 


People can have ideas but their ideas may not be the logical one and voting the illogical more does not make it the logical.

Share this post


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


People can have ideas but their ideas may not be the logical one and voting the illogical more does not make it the logical.

Can you name some places where non-democratic forms of government server the citizens better than an average democracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Can you name some places where non-democratic forms of government server the citizens better than an average democracy?


Actually we dont have an exact democratic form of govt in the World. I am telling you the facts, all country managements works in this way. Do you really believe that some white beard "wise" people will base the management of a country to your votes ? This would be a very naive idea. These powers just gives you an apple candy and they name it "democracy". While you are happly sucking this candy, they do whatever they want to do. For example American people voted for Trump is not it ? Trump is representing a group in power in US. Another group in power in US (for example Pentagon) said they dont care about what Trump says, many US army officials have made such statements. Because according to Pentagon mindset, people voting more for an "idiot" does not make him someone "have to be" obeyed. This is only one example, you can find millions of other examples. Start with examining Canada govt and its ties with Britain.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Altai said:


Actually we dont have an exact democratic form of govt in the World. I am telling you the facts, all country managements works in this way. Do you really believe that some white beard "wise" people will base the management of a country to your votes ? This would be a very naive idea. These powers just gives you an apple candy and they name it "democracy". While you are happly sucking this candy, they do whatever they want to do. For example American people voted for Trump is not it ? Trump is representing a group in power in US. Another group in power in US (for example Pentagon) said they dont care about what Trump says, many US army officials have made such statements. Because according to Pentagon mindset, people voting more for an "idiot" does not make him someone "have to be" obeyed. This is only one example, you can find millions of other examples. Start with examining Canada govt and its ties with Britain.

 

OK sure Altai, there's no debating with a conspiracy theorist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

OK sure Altai, there's no debating with a conspiracy theorist.


I can understand that. This is human nature. Human is prone to laziness and comfort congenitally.  They dont like to think in detailed way, they like to think straight. Less people care to investigate about details, less people care to collect information and create logical conclusions. You and many other people are happy with sucking their apple candy. This is why democracy is a big nonsense. Your straight thoughts may not be the logical one all the time. 


I remember a speaker was asking people on the street "If a tap filling a pool in 1 hour, how many hours two tap would fill it ?" and people in general was responding "Two hours". 

You are one of these  "two hour" guys.

 

Edited by Altai
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2018 at 1:35 AM, Altai said:


I can understand that. This is human nature. Human is prone to laziness and comfort congenitally.  They dont like to think in detailed way, they like to think straight. Less people care to investigate about details, less people care to collect information and create logical conclusions. You and many other people are happy with sucking their apple candy. This is why democracy is a big nonsense. Your straight thoughts may not be the logical one all the time. 


I remember a speaker was asking people on the street "If a tap filling a pool in 1 hour, how many hours two tap would fill it ?" and people in general was responding "Two hours". 

You are one of these  "two hour" guys.

 

Just because I don't subscribe to your drivel doesn't mean I can't do simple math Altai. A reasonable person would assume quite the opposite.

You're the one who can't answer a simple question; "Can you name some places where non-democratic forms of government serve the citizens better than an average democracy"?

I don't care whether you feel like democracy lives up to your expectations. That's not what I asked you. 

There's an obvious difference between having someone like Harper or Scheer running your country or a complete idiot like Justin Trudeau, and you're being completely disingenuous if you disagree with that statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×