Yep, that’s what I thought: you can find examples pro and con on both sides.
Hence I conclude that the statement “Europeans are less democratic” or “the US is more democratic” doesn’t hold up.
Also interesting to see that CF and Fred have avoided the question altogether. (Afraid to admit you were wrong?)
Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, surely…?
No, I’ve avoided the debate because I can’t understand what you’re talking about, and so the only way I can debate you is to insult you. But since you’ve told me how sensitive you are about being insulted, I’ve backed off.
It takes too much energy to debate you seriously, anyway, Rascal. Facts you would expect someone to know and logic you would expect someone to employ are completely alien to you.
It makes more sense that way, CF.
It makes more sense that way, CF.[/quote]
No, it doesn’t, but it is more satisfying.
Besides, you trade insults well and you’re understandable, so what are you worried about?
I thought insults are ok only if you are right (think you are right)? Now insults by you against me are ok if you can’t understand an argument? 
Well, now we all know how smart you are and how stupid I am. Thanks for clarifying that but avoiding the question with your arrogant statements does certainly have a meaning, too.
Have a nice weekend!
I thought insults are ok only if you are right (think you are right)? Now insults by you against me are ok if you can’t understand an argument? [/quote]
In the past, I would occasionally wade in to decipher your writings, either because I was bored or because I wanted to pick on you. As I told you before, however, most of time I have better people to argue with. I won’t be sending a Christmas card to Mother Theresa anytime soon, but at least he’s easy to argue with. I don’t have to guess what he means. As George Santayana once said of Bertrand Russell, “he writes so clear that it’s always easy to see exactly where he is wrong.” No one will ever be saying that of your writing, Rascal.
Same to you.
While in principle I’m totally in favor of freedom of political expression, not excluding views espousing hatred or racism, in this particular case I must be inconsistent in sympathizing with the German government. The examples given are extreme cases and seem unreasonable; nevertheless, I think the intention of this policy is honorable.
Consider Japan, where they offer apologies and reparations to foreign countries when expedient, while at home they continue to teach that the motive for their actions in WWII was the ‘liberation’ of their Asian brothers from Western imperialism – and don’t bother to mention having used those “brothers” in chemical/biological warfare experiments or having been the first nation to practice unrestricted bombing on an undefended civilian population (in Shanghai). Not to mention the rape of Nanjing, of course.
I remember back in high school seeing fliers posted around my school stating that the Holocaust was a myth. I really wonder whether anyone out there seriously believes this line, or whether it’s just an intellectual strategem used by anti-Semites.
The US is one country whereas Europe is a continent. How about is europe less democratic than the American continent?
There are two American continents, actually. I will grant that Western Europe is considerably more democratic than Latin America. Though perhaps Latin America is more democratic than Eastern Europe.
Good point though I guess we could just see Europe = ‘European countries with a democratic government’ in the context of the discussion.
Strange though that those who always pick on me make such a mistake … 
It makes more sense that way, CF.[/quote]
No, it doesn’t, but it is more satisfying.
Besides, you trade insults well and you’re understandable, so what are you worried about?[/quote]
I like blowing off steam here. I choose to put insults into my posts, as this is the mood of this board.
Rascal:
Sorry just got to this, not avoiding the issue. I think that the EU government for example is very undemocratic. The representatives are often appointed and the decisions are not subject to any sort of accountability that elected officials must face. As to the constitution being debated, does anyone here really know what is involved and what it entails? Europeans?
As to the rest of Europe being democratic or not, I would go country by country. I would say that France for example is dominated by technocrats from the right universities and that this in turn colors a lot of the government’s decisions. A bit of the old noblesse oblige in all its condescension seems visible in France.
Italy suffers from corruption as does Belgium and Greece that limits effective popular will from being expressed. I am sure that this is also true in the United States, but I would argue that it is an issue of degrees.
As to the comment about America and the continent, this is a tiresome old stickler. Americans are free to call themselves whatever they want. United Statesians anyone? While America is also a continent that issue was only brought up by Latin leftists who wanted to score points regarding American arrogance.
The question was if Europe (i.e. the democratic European countries) are less democratic based on the argument given by you and agreed by CF.
Can I get a clear answer to that? CF is avoiding it but can you hold up your claim or would you not agree that is was just bullocks!?
Rascal:
Fair question. Let me ask one thing first (bear with me).
How are the representatives in the EU Parliament chosen? How is the EU constitution being written? How does it follow that Spain and Poland are to be given similar representation to more populous countries?
So to some extent my comment about Europe meant European Union. Now are you one government or aren’t you? When it comes to Iraq, everone should be following the EU foreign policy directives (even though obviously that is not the case), which are decided how? by whom? If you cannot answer this, that would seem to indicate a slight skewing of the democratic process to those who “know better” or indicate that there are people not subject to election making some very important decisions in Europe.
Then as I have mentioned earlier, there is a need to examine country by country.
But since most of these previously “national” decisions (foreign policy, laws etc.) now must be in compliance with EU law, I think my point remains valid.
EU has its undemocratic sides, but they will be ironed out, as it moves toward a federation, which it BTW hardly qualifies as yet. It started out as an intergovernment cooperative body and have only moved toward the supranational stage recently.
Europe is a much more diverse place than the US. therefore, there will be more democratic places than the US (Scandinavia UK Germany) and very undemocratic ones (Belarus). My argument is built on the places which I know well (Denmark), rather than the ones I’m less familiar to (Russia, Ukraine, Italy etc).
[quote=“Mr He”]EU has its undemocratic sides, but they will be ironed out, as it moves toward a federation, which it BTW hardly qualifies as yet. It started out as an intergovernment cooperative body and have only moved toward the supranational stage recently.
Europe is a much more diverse place than the US. therefore, there will be more democratic places than the US (Scandinavia UK Germany) and very undemocratic ones (Belarus). My argument is built on the places which I know well (Denmark), rather than the ones I’m less familiar to (Russia, Ukraine, Italy etc).[/quote]
Mr. He,
Here is an excerpt from an article on what may be in store for the EU as it moves toward federalism:
[quote=“Jonah Goldberg”]And it’s true. America does have a tremendous capacity to get bogged down on issues European nations skip merrily past. This was probably why Adlai Stevenson said America could choke on a gnat but swallow tigers whole.
But this is coming to an end. As Europe continues to integrate into a United States of Europe, it will in all likelihood become a United States of Europe. One of the chief reasons America’s politics have become so bizarre is precisely because America has been undergoing its own unification. What we call federalism the loosening of central government control over the various states, as opposed to the European meaning of centralization has been under siege. The tightening of this control is why America looks like a place where “abortions for some, miniature American flags for others” sounds like a pretty good slogan.
The problem in America is that we have a vast, multicultural nation in which certain people want to live one way and other people who live thousands of miles away want to live another way. But we have a central government that increasingly believes its way is the only way.[/quote]
You can read the entire article here:
I was making a point Rascal/mod lang. Even in the context of this discussion, Europe is a whole load of different countries with differing systems. The ‘european government’ is a very loose system, still in it’s infancy. I still feel it is absurd to compare so many different countries as one lump with America which is only one.
I am fully aware that a virtual boundary exists…north and south America. Again i was making a point.
Well, the concept of Europeanness is a bit more hazy than the concept of americanness. You have not quite fee abortion inGerman, and abortion allowed up to the 24th week in UK. I think that the EU will be an altogether looser federation than US and that a great deal of the dividing issues will remain at the nation-state level. The Subsidiarity principle should safeguard against that, IE only matters, which are a direct concern of the EU is to be touched by the EU, while matters in the “grey zone” is to be handled on the state level.
@Southpaw: point taken; but as said this issue started in another thread and I thought it’s fair to cut some slack to get to the point (with fred and CF) of my question.
If you want to discuss the issue in general then I absolutely agree with you that a comparision between America and Europe is flawed.
Now CF has admitted that he is too stupid to understand the question and fred joins him in dodging it so I guess I can reach the answer by conclusion.
I am just disappointed that they can’t admit that they were wrong. It’s not a big issue which I would bring up again (later) but it would show some character.