Charlie Hebdo massacre - 2015-Jan-07 (23 Viewers)

[Maddy]

As a citizen you have the right to believe what you want, that doesn't mean though that any kind of political party can be formed. Because the minute you allow parties whose politics are based on religion to be formed and to enter politics, it directly contradicts one of the main tenets your country was based on, and that is secularism. There are no absolute freedoms as you mentioned earlier, and you have to draw the line somewhere. For a secular democracy, I feel it's self evident that that line is there.

That's kool you feel it's there. I don't and to my knowledge neither does any of the democracies in Scandinavia. Democracies the continuously gets ranked as the best in the World.

And, yes Denmark is a constitutional monarchy.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Seven]

That's kool you feel it's there. I don't and to my knowledge neither does any of the democracies in Scandinavia. Democracies the continuously gets ranked as the best in the World.

And, yes Denmark is a constitutional monarchy.

Unless of course the party would actually be elected to rule and start to implement the ideas they were elected to implement.

At which point you can't stop the idiocy you have created.

 

[Maddy]

You think my rhetoric in all this is right wing? When my counterexample is the danger of fascism?

I said you had the same rhetoric as the right wing of Denmark.

 

[Seven]

I said you had the same rhetoric as the right wing of Denmark.

I don't know their stance on issues.

One of my biggest pet peeves is the protection of minorities though, so I think it's unlikely that I'd agree on a lot of things with them.

 

[Maddy]

Unless of course the party would actually be elected to rule and start to implement the ideas they were elected to implement.

At which point you can't stop the idiocy you have created.

And we are back to the dilemma of Democracy. I simply do not understand why you want to continue? I've made my opinion clear as a day. You do not agree. Fair. But my opinion isn't far-fetched. It's shared among many just liek yours are.

- - - Updated - - -

One of my biggest pet peeves is the protection of minorities though, so I think it's unlikely that I'd agree on a lot of things with them.

Unliekly yes. Protection of minority is soemthing I put in very high regard as well. Another of the democratic keystones.

Thing is we are both democrats and we agree a long way. It's pretty much an academical disagreement we have right now on where to draw the line.

 

[Seven]

And we are back to the dilemma of Democracy. I simply do not understand why you want to continue? I've made my opinion clear as a day. You do not agree. Fair. But my opinion isn't far-fetched. It's shared among many just liek yours are.

But your ideas aren't a feasible construction. They contradict each other. Don't you see this?

You're saying the party can exist and members of the party can be elected. But you're also saying they cannot implement their ideas as they are antidemocratic.

What you get in this construction is that you'd have to create laws which completely destroy the most basic notion of democracy (namely that people who are elected rule) and which are deeply hypocritical in nature. Furthermore you have World War II as an example of why it is not a good idea.


- - - Updated - - -

Thing is we are both democrats and we agree a long way. It's pretty much an academical disagreement we have right now on where to draw the line.

Oh, I've been sure about that for a long time. In all likelihood we vote for similar parties and share similar ideas about what society should look like.

It's just that I can't understand your academic hypothesis, because in my opinion it doesn't add up and I don't see how you can make it work.

 

[Maddy]

If you're a scholar and you think this is the way to go, you're just stupid.

I think we are threw. I had hope to keep it civil.

 

[Seven]

I think we are threw. I had hope to keep it civil.

I removed the line as it was a bit overboard. My mistake, things can get heated.

 

[Fred]

That's kool you feel it's there. I don't and to my knowledge neither does any of the democracies in Scandinavia. Democracies the continuously gets ranked as the best in the World.

And, yes Denmark is a constitutional monarchy.

I've never actually lived in a democracy, so my arguments are purely academic here But is it really not self evident that in a secular democracy you cannot allow a party whose politics are in direct and blatant contradiction with the very definition of secularism? Well maybe self evident is a stretch, but I am fairly surprised that you have no problem allowing blatantly non secular parties entering politics and potentially overriding the very principles your country was built on, I find the example Seven brought up, of Germany pre WW2 very relevant here.

 

[Maddy]

I removed the line as it was a bit overboard. My mistake, things can get heated.

I have to abandon you anyway.

'cause how ironic it might sound I have a project on Democracy, Freedom of Speech and it's educational implementation in the Danish School system to write.

 

[Fred]

@Maddy, I do have to say though, if there ever was a radical liberal, you take the hat. I don't know if you take that as a compliment

 

[Maddy]

I've never actually lived in a democracy, so my arguments are purely academic here But is it really not self evident that in a secular democracy you cannot allow a party whose politics are in direct and blatant contradiction with the very definition of secularism? Well maybe self evident is a stretch, but I am fairly surprised that you have no problem allowing blatantly non secular parties entering politics and potentially overriding the very principles your country was built on, I find the example Seven brought up, of Germany pre WW2 very relevant here.

Out of tiem. But I've stated it before it's the dilemma of democracy and why it isn't perfect. I will not disallow non-democratic parties in a pluralistic democratic society, just liek they aren't in Denmark (and the rest of Scandinavia to my knowledge).

Perhaps I need to reconsider that in 20 years, then I'll do that. But currently that's my academic take on democracy and one I firmly believe in.

- - - Updated - - -

@Maddy, I do have to say though, if there ever was a radical liberal, you take the hat. I don't know if you take that as a compliment

Thank you

Altho I'm more of a Social Democrat

 

[Raz]

Anarchy, that's the real way. Fuck shit up and do what you want, that's the real freedom.

 

[Fred]

Out of tiem. But I've stated it before it's the dilemma of democracy and why it isn't perfect. I will not disallow non-democratic parties in a pluralistic democratic society, just liek they aren't in Denmark (and the rest of Scandinavia to my knowledge).

Perhaps I need to reconsider that in 20 years, then I'll do that. But currently that's my academic take on democracy and one I firmly believe in.

Ok, I'll remind you of that in 20 years, and perhaps we can have another debate then.

 

[Seven]

Anarchy, that's the real way. Fuck shit up and do what you want, that's the real freedom.

No, but it is pure fear.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, I'll remind you of that in 20 years, and perhaps we can have another debate then.

Unless we are slaves to our fascist, yet democratically elected, overlords.

 

[Raz]

On a bit more off topic point. You guys take stuff way way too seriously.

 

[Fred]

Anarchy, that's the real way. Fuck shit up and do what you want, that's the real freedom.

Thats how Libya is now, if ever you want a case study on Anarchy there it is. I've lost count of the number of governments we have, its nothing but ink on paper these days.

- - - Updated - - -

No, but it is pure fear.

- - - Updated - - -



Unless we are slaves to our fascist, yet democratically elected, overlords.

Speak for yourself, we're already used to that in this part of the world

 

[Maddy]

Ok, I'll remind you of that in 20 years, and perhaps we can have another debate then.

Do that. And I'll remind you in 20 years how it feels when your Football Club wins a trophy that matters

Dat 30 year old Arsenal slump

 

[Seven]

Speak for yourself, we're already used to that in this part of the world

You probably didn't elect them though .

- - - Updated - - -

Do that. And I'll remind you in 20 years how it feels when your Football Club wins a trophy that matters

Dat 30 year old Arsenal slump

That is a very optimistic estimate.

 

[Tevez10]

So what's the freedom of speech? I don't want a literal answer.