Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
same here man, i respect you, and i disagree with you, that's why i go to such lenggths to argue with you.
i thought you called me a conformist for putting up with the limitations of democracy & for prefering to protect & defend it over other forms of government... show me something better and i'll convert, but in the meantime this is what i fight for you see, because we have nothing better, but could be much much worse.
i suppose mexican democracy has changed recently after the zapatistas & 70 years of PRI rule, and that prehaps because some people thought they could do a little better. i know it's fashionable to shit on the outgoing president, but if you don't believe me there's been progress in your country, go read that book by whats the name of this guy... jose agustin... his first book, hm... DE PERFIL. and think also about the massacres that came after that book was written. not sure that has happened, has it? but anyway, there are a lot of people in your country fighting to bring true democracy... which is still an incomplete project.
i don't know in how many ways to explain this, but i think that you are wrong on giving up on an incomplete project rather than helping to complete it. im not judging you from a moral stance, but i do criticize your... how can i say this.. your epistemological toolkit? or should i say simply, i think you've arrived to the wrong conclusion due to some faulty premises.
i'd like to discuss thos premises alone if we can. you know, no calling people this or that, just looking at the... way of knowing, so to speak.boil it down to essentials. i think if we narrow the issue sufficiently it will be easy to understand each other.
let's give it a try?
---
so:
let me see if i summarize your points correctly. you seem to be saying:
a) democracy is a flawed system of government
b) because it's flawed, it is not worth supporting it
am i correct?
let me know if i read you right before i continue.
|
yes, sorry i called you a conformist, i meant that your position was (or seems) to be that.
again, yes, democracy is the least worse of government forms, i agree and us people in democratic countries are better of than others with other political fronts in power.
and, i didn't want to go to specifications but if we must; i hate it when people here are all "the president sucks, blah blah!" (although that's a worldwide phenomenon, innit?), i think calderon is a great president and a really smart one, and much better than the other guy (lopez obrador) who was an extremist totalitarian. yes progress was made, and things are better; contrary to popular belief, the pri rule wasn't all bad, and we're in a much better position than most countries. the zapatistas have done nothing except take over lands.
my whole point is that we can aim higher, and that things are not started being full fledged, they start somewhere, even if the ideas are not exactly clear to begin with, they can form something else.
and to say it:
1) yes
2) yes
although, as there are no new ways of government yet, one has to live in this world and what's happening in it, so you can't completely ignore what's happening around you (i think that's something that wasn't clear before) but that doesn't mean that's an end to the problem.