Poles to bring the case for the CoFSM before the ECHR

Started by Martinus, March 18, 2013, 10:15:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

crazy canuck

Quote from: Razgovory on March 21, 2013, 02:47:40 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on March 21, 2013, 12:41:10 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 20, 2013, 06:48:04 PM
I think the word "liberal democracy" is best to describe the narrower version of Democracy as CC sees it.

You will note that in my very first post on the subject I said that the Rule of Law was critical to a healthy democracy.  What you seem to think of democracy is form over substance.

I'm looking at it as a political system, and not relying on a value judgment to define it.

I am not sure what that means.  How can one evaluate whether a purported democratic system is actually democratic without analyzing it through the lens of the Rule of Law?

Admiral Yi

I'm not sure how gerrymandering relates to the rule of law.  State legislatures pass gerrymandering laws.

Valmy

Quote from: crazy canuck on March 21, 2013, 12:45:43 PM
The debate was joined over the question of whether any system created by democratically elected governments will always be democratic.

Well obviously not.  I refer back to my example of Pierre Laval's parliamentary coup and the creation of the Vichy government in 1940.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

crazy canuck

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 21, 2013, 02:55:02 PM
I'm not sure how gerrymandering relates to the rule of law.  State legislatures pass gerrymandering laws.

I am not sure how the Rule of Law doesnt apply in your example.

Admiral Yi



Razgovory

I'm not looking at as positive or negative.  You are looking at it as a positive value, now while I don't disagree that a good democracy is a positive, I'm not defining it as as necessarily positive.  To define it as a positive you have to add in other things like rule of law and minority rights, which in my opinion alters the definition.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

crazy canuck

Quote from: Razgovory on March 21, 2013, 03:02:10 PM
I'm not looking at as positive or negative.  You are looking at it as a positive value, now while I don't disagree that a good democracy is a positive, I'm not defining it as as necessarily positive.  To define it as a positive you have to add in other things like rule of law and minority rights, which in my opinion alters the definition.

I still dont know what you are talking about.  How did an analysis of the type of system used in a democracy become question of positive and negative values.  I suppose a system that is corrupt is bad and a system that is not is good.  Is that all you are saying?  because if that is it why are you arguing with me?

Sheilbh

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 21, 2013, 02:55:02 PM
I'm not sure how gerrymandering relates to the rule of law.  State legislatures pass gerrymandering laws.
There's more to the rule of law than passing laws. A legislature could legislate for, say, deportation of immigrants with no right to appeal. That would be a law, from a democratic legislature, but wouldn't be following the rule of law.

Also democracy and rule of law don't necessarily go together. Look at Singapore or apartheid South Africa.
Let's bomb Russia!

Admiral Yi

Quote from: Sheilbh on March 21, 2013, 06:40:45 PM
There's more to the rule of law than passing laws. A legislature could legislate for, say, deportation of immigrants with no right to appeal. That would be a law, from a democratic legislature, but wouldn't be following the rule of law.

Why not?

Razgovory

Quote from: crazy canuck on March 21, 2013, 04:29:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 21, 2013, 03:02:10 PM
I'm not looking at as positive or negative.  You are looking at it as a positive value, now while I don't disagree that a good democracy is a positive, I'm not defining it as as necessarily positive.  To define it as a positive you have to add in other things like rule of law and minority rights, which in my opinion alters the definition.

I still dont know what you are talking about.  How did an analysis of the type of system used in a democracy become question of positive and negative values.  I suppose a system that is corrupt is bad and a system that is not is good.  Is that all you are saying?  because if that is it why are you arguing with me?

I'm saying that a corrupt and bad democracy is still a form of democracy.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Sheilbh

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 21, 2013, 06:45:30 PM
Why not?
Because there's more to the rule of law - even in the most stripped back understanding - than that a law is legally passed.

Edit: Sorry to revive but I meant to answer this and then got reminded by first time offender thread.
Let's bomb Russia!