Turkish police use tear gas, injure dozens in break up of protests

[Razgovory]

Military dictatorship is a good thing in the muslim world.

I wonder if Tamas and Viking agree with you.  It's better to have secular despot then a Democratically elected Islamist.

[Sheilbh]

Also: are these protests really causing Erdogan to come out of the islamist closet? What kind of retard comments are those?

No. They're just exacerbating his authoritarian streak. I think he called Twitter a plague and was a bit ranty ('destroying people's property! Is this democracy?'). A bit Orbanish if you will

I agree. However, such persons usually have a tendency to get into a situation where the mask comes off. Hell, it happened even to Chancellor Kohl who was a champion of sitting back and waiting for a situation to blow over when he refused to reveal the source of 2 million DM he had accepted on behalf of his party, because he had given his "word of honor" that he wouldn't reveal the donor.

That makes me think another point could be that if this continues then his own party may decide he's becoming a problem. That's what happened to Thatcher (and, I think, Kohl) who were similarly strong PMs.

The AKP's constitutional plans failed but I think it poisoned the waters between Erdogan and Gul, and there was a rump of AKP MPs voting against their proposals. If he's not flexible enough and this becomes serious enough then the party may vote him out.

[Neil]

Military dictatorship is a good thing in the muslim world.

I wonder if Tamas and Viking agree with you.  It's better to have secular despot then a Democratically elected Islamist.

Viking most assuredly would.

[Razgovory]

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

[Neil]

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

I don't think that's quite right.

[DGuller]

I wouldn't have expected so many people to be endorsing military dictatorship.

When the alternative is a democracy self-devolving into theocracy, military dictatorship doesn't seem like a half-bad alternative.  It's a vicious circle, you don't teach people to defend democratic institutions by instituting dictatorship, but theocracy doesn't quite do that either.

[Viking]

Military dictatorship is a good thing in the muslim world.

I wonder if Tamas and Viking agree with you.  It's better to have secular despot then a Democratically elected Islamist.

Viking most assuredly would.

I certainly do. Better a secular despot than an elected Islamist.

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

Not at all.

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

I don't think that's quite right.

See? It takes one to know one so Neil is the ideal witness to truth here.



The fundamental problem with the Islamist, even the peaceful one using Democratic means, is that Islamism in and of itself is anti-Democratic. The very central core of Islamist ideology is that the Shariah is the law given by God to man and that man is obligated to follow this law or be punished by Gods followers in this lifetime and by God in the next. Islamism is all about dismantling any democracy it might find itself in control of and replacing it with the 7th century example set by Muhammed and the Rightly Guided Califs. The way to replace an injust (in their view this means un-islamic) ruler is for the faithful to revolt violently against him and replace him.

This is fundamentally anti-democratic. When you vote in anti-democratic parties, you just held your last free election.

The advantage of the secular despot is that the secular despot cannot and usually does not pretend to have a viable alternative to western liberal democracy. I choose the evil which admits that it is the lesser of many evils rather than the one that falsely pretends that it is good.

This view is not a result of my atheism, but rather a result of my politics.

[Razgovory]

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

I don't think that's quite right.

Oh, I think it is.  Dawkins himself signed a petitions to outlaw the teaching of religion on the UK, has said that teaching religion to children is as bad as child abuse, and his meme theory attacks the idea of freedom of speech and religion.

[Razgovory]

I wouldn't have expected so many people to be endorsing military dictatorship.

When the alternative is a democracy self-devolving into theocracy, military dictatorship doesn't seem like a half-bad alternative.  It's a vicious circle, you don't teach people to defend democratic institutions by instituting dictatorship, but theocracy doesn't quite do that either.

Yeah, it hasn't devolved into theocracy yet.  Simply because some people protest does not mean the country has become a theocracy.

[Razgovory]

Military dictatorship is a good thing in the muslim world.

I wonder if Tamas and Viking agree with you.  It's better to have secular despot then a Democratically elected Islamist.

Viking most assuredly would.

I certainly do. Better a secular despot than an elected Islamist.

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

Not at all.

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

I don't think that's quite right.

See? It takes one to know one so Neil is the ideal witness to truth here.



The fundamental problem with the Islamist, even the peaceful one using Democratic means, is that Islamism in and of itself is anti-Democratic. The very central core of Islamist ideology is that the Shariah is the law given by God to man and that man is obligated to follow this law or be punished by Gods followers in this lifetime and by God in the next. Islamism is all about dismantling any democracy it might find itself in control of and replacing it with the 7th century example set by Muhammed and the Rightly Guided Califs. The way to replace an injust (in their view this means un-islamic) ruler is for the faithful to revolt violently against him and replace him.

This is fundamentally anti-democratic. When you vote in anti-democratic parties, you just held your last free election.

The advantage of the secular despot is that the secular despot cannot and usually does not pretend to have a viable alternative to western liberal democracy. I choose the evil which admits that it is the lesser of many evils rather than the one that falsely pretends that it is good.

This view is not a result of my atheism, but rather a result of my politics.

It would appear that you are prime example of the authoritarian streak in the Dawkinites.  You just endorsed dictatorship.

[DGuller]

Yeah, it hasn't devolved into theocracy yet.  Simply because some people protest does not mean the country has become a theocracy.

No, but democratic institutions, limited as they already were in Turkey, are being eroded.  We don't know what the end game is, maybe Erdogan is more interested in becoming Turkey's Putin rather than Turkey's Khomeini, but in any case, democracy without institutions is no democracy.

[Razgovory]

Yeah, it hasn't devolved into theocracy yet.  Simply because some people protest does not mean the country has become a theocracy.

No, but democratic institutions, limited as they already were in Turkey, are being eroded.  We don't know what the end game is, maybe Erdogan is more interested in becoming Turkey's Putin rather than Turkey's Khomeini, but in any case, democracy without institutions is no democracy.

Or he could just be Turkey's George W. Bush.

Destroying democracy to save it seems like a losing proposition, and if I am to understand correctly Democracy is so fragile in Turkey because of the secularists in the military keep overthrowing the government.

[DGuller]

Or he could just be Turkey's George W. Bush.

Destroying democracy to save it seems like a losing proposition, and if I am to understand correctly Democracy is so fragile in Turkey because of the secularists in the military keep overthrowing the government.

That's the nature of democracy.  When it takes hold, it's self-reinforcing;  when it's not mature, it can easily be self-destructing.  Sometimes you just can't win.

[Viking]

There is a strong authoritarian streak in the Dawkin fans.

I don't think that's quite right.

Oh, I think it is.  Dawkins himself signed a petitions to outlaw the teaching of religion on the UK, has said that teaching religion to children is as bad as child abuse, and his meme theory attacks the idea of freedom of speech and religion.

He signed a petition trying to ban the teaching of religion as if it were true in government schools in the UK. He wishes the UK law on the issue to be like the US law. He considers threatening children with the fear of hell as equivalent to child abuse. He agrees with Dan Dennet in teaching it as literature and that teaching comparative religion is probably the best way (apart from reading the bible cover to cover) to de-convert the religious. His meme hypothesis does not attack anything.

I have no desire to discuss this with you, but did see the need, just in case anybody takes you seriously, that you are completely wrong.

[Viking]

It would appear that you are prime example of the authoritarian streak in the Dawkinites.  You just endorsed dictatorship.

No I did not you blithering idiot. I was preferring the lesser of two evils when democracy is not possible.