Quote:
|
Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov
There is a difference between what I would call democracy and what I would call majority-dictatorship.
|
Democracy simply is majority rule. Lots of organisations have internal democracy - trade unions, for example. Some political parties have internal democracy. Even some businesses do.
Liberal democracy is about voting for candidates/parties to run a limited state (limited by individual rights). The difference between Western democracy and Islamic democracy is the limits on the state. Both are democratic, but our states are prevented from interfering in the lives of individuals in ways their states are not. Put another way, I don't think the oppressed individual cares whether his oppressor seized power in a coup or was voted in by a majority of his countrymen. It is the oppressive act that is wrong, not how the oppressor gained the power to inflict it.
Democracy can be a partial safeguard against oppression, because people will naturally be fearful of voting in an oppressive government. But when that oppression is clearly targetted against a specific minority, a majority may feel that it is safe to vote for the oppressor. In such circumstances, democracy can be a tool of oppression.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by s|k
Because the other parties that were voted into seats by the minority have powers as well, but yes they aren't as influential as the majority parties.
|
What powers do minority parties have?
__________________
“They were totally confused,” said the
birdman, whose flying suit gives him a passing resemblance to Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story. “The authorities said that I was an unregistered aircraft and to fly, you need a licence. I told them, ‘No. To fly, you need wings’.”