五千年(敝帚自珍)

主题:破除票选即民主的巫思 -- 迷惑不解

共:💬35 🌺175
分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 3
下页 末页
      • 家园 现在手段比投石子,投黄豆进步多了,基层选举一地鸡毛。

        前些年农村的基层选举,选出来的,基本都是地痞流氓黑社会,另外是家族势力大的,然后就是一堆侵吞集体资产的操作。到现在,还在为当年的选举擦屁股。

        选举作为形式,搞起来不复杂,当年延安边区是投石子,投黄豆选举。国统区也可以这么搞,但是这么搞的的结果会怎么样,可想而知。

        与其说是选举的问题,不如说是选举的前置条件,经济的,政治的,存在各种问题。不解决这些,给一个区域送上堆选票,就期望美好的结果,幼稚了。

        一个村子能选出黑社会,其实一个社区,一个城市也可以,参见乡港哪些垃圾议员。一个国家也可以,参见土鸡国逆世俗化的埃苏丹,和米粒尖的川皇。

        国内,还面临某些分裂势力局部做大,靠选举弄成割据政权的问题。

        对有意改造这个社会的国内精英来说,提升自己,变成企业家,律师,医生,政府官员;积极参与地方事务,建言献策,早点进入人大、政协体系,通过体制内的法律法规修改,通过议案去推动社会进步,更靠谱一些。

        通宝推:审度,
      • 家园 先有穷人翻身,然后投石子中才有民主

        我斥责的是把投石子当成民主,是没有人民的民主。你说的是废话,我说的同样是废话,所以我最后说,我们应该为驴子加油,不要剥夺它心中的希望。

        通宝推:白浪滔天,李根,
    • 家园 我记得以前有人论证过,民主只有可能存在于利益大体一致的群

      体中,比如狼吃羊这个问题,到底是清蒸还是红烧,在狼群里,这是可以讨论的,可以讲民主的,因为在吃羊这个大原则上狼之间是没有分歧的,分歧主要存在于怎么吃这个细节性的技术问题,但在狼和羊组成的这个食物链中,要不要吃羊这个问题上是没办法讲民主的,社会主义的民主之所以是无产阶级民主,之所以是真民主,也是有生产资料公有制这个经济制度为基础的,这个经济基础确保了大多数无产阶级的根本利益是一致的,无产阶级和无产阶级之间的矛盾是可以调解,协商的。

      通宝推:燕人,达雅,
      • 家园 公有制才是民主的基础

        民主顾名思义就是多数人的治理。在没有公有制的基础之上谈民主就是欺骗。苏联解体前西方是不会自我标榜民主的,他们的口号是自由。苏联解体后,西方急忙把这个政治正确的说辞抢了过来。估计直接用也讪讪,就用了个liberal democracy. 这俩词放在一起是矛盾的,不伦不类。

        通宝推:acton,
        • 家园 这种说法有什么依据么

          苏联解体前西方是不会自我标榜民主的,他们的口号是自由。

          无论是丘吉尔的铁幕演说,还是乔治凯南的“八千字电文”,他们标榜的民主远多过自由。

          • 家园 另外几乎所有社会主义国家的名字都带有”民主”两字

            当然咱没凑这个热闹

            • 家园 绝大部分社会主义国家的名字不带民主二字

              现存的社会主义国家里三个国名不包括民主,两个包括民主,三比二。中华人民共和国,古巴共和国,越南社会主义共和国。朝鲜民主主义人民共和国,老挝人民民主共和国

              原社会主义国家里国名带民主的更少,九比一。苏维埃社会主义共和国联盟,罗马尼亚社会主义共和国,保加利亚人民共和国,捷克斯洛伐克社会主义共和国,阿尔巴尼亚社会主义人民共和国,南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国,匈牙利人民共和国,波兰人民共和国,蒙古人民共和国。独苗是德意志民主共和國。

              其他亚非拉的有些国家也号称是社会主义国家,但是各方意见不统一。

              • 家园 你是对的

                赞。我脑子闪过几个名字就脱口而出。没有考证。河里不能轻率,随时打脸啊。

                • 家园 都带“人民”两个字

                  不是“民主”。你应该是记混了

                  • 家园 投奔自由世界,这是西方和台、韩等所谓民主国家的口号 -- 有补充

                    可从来没有 来吧我们一起民主 这样的口号

                    作者 对本帖的 补充(1)
                    家园 可以完全确定的是:西方阵营以自由世界自居,而对应的, -- 补充帖

                    社会主义阵营则以 人民当家做主 为口号。

                    西方阵营的头头(其实它并不是一个完全民主的国家--以西方的民主标准评估的公开结果)打不远前呱呱坠地就是以自由为立基,而不是以民主。骨子里深深埋藏着的就是自由的基因。

                    别不承认,那些人为什么要离开英国,就是因为 不自由毋宁死 的精神,而不是为了追求民主。

                    通宝推:未知如之何,武仙,呦唔,
                  • 见前补充 4607759
              • 家园 本朝国名里之所以不包含

                民主,是因为当初觉得民主是包含在共和里面的,如果再共和前面再加上民主。就显得重复,所以只叫共和国

          • 家园 你可能记错了

            在丘吉尔的铁幕演说里至少提了7次free/freedom, 只有两次提到democracy/democratic, 而且是free democratic...

            • 家园 我们应该是看的同一个版本吧

              I am glad to come to Westminster College this afternoon, and am complimented that you should give me a degree. The name "Westminster" is somehow familiar to me.

              I seem to have heard of it before. Indeed, it was at Westminster that I received a very large part of my education in politics, dialectic, rhetoric, and one or two other things. In fact we have both been educated at the same, or similar, or, at any rate, kindred establishments.

              It is also an honour, perhaps almost unique, for a private visitor to be introduced to an academic audience by the President of the United States. Amid his heavy burdens, duties, and responsibilities-unsought but not recoiled from-the President has travelled a thousand miles to dignify and magnify our meeting here to-day and to give me an opportunity of addressing this kindred nation, as well as my own countrymen across the ocean, and perhaps some other countries too. The President has told you that it is his wish, as I am sure it is yours, that I should have full liberty to give my true and faithful counsel in these anxious and baffling times. I shall certainly avail myself of this freedom, and feel the more right to do so because any private ambitions I may have cherished in my younger days have been satisfied beyond my wildest dreams. Let me, however, make it clear that I have no official mission or status of any kind, and that I speak only for myself. There is nothing here but what you see.

              I can therefore allow my mind, with the experience of a lifetime, to play over the problems which beset us on the morrow of our absolute victory in arms, and to try to make sure with what strength I have that what has been gained with so much sacrifice and suffering shall be preserved for the future glory and safety of mankind.

              The United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a solemn moment for the American Democracy. For with primacy in power is also joined an awe inspiring accountability to the future. If you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of duty done but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level of achievement. Opportunity is here now, clear and shining for both our countries. To reject it or ignore it or fritter it away will bring upon us all the long reproaches of the after-time. It is necessary that constancy of mind, persistency of purpose, and the grand simplicity of decision shall guide and rule the conduct of the English-speaking peoples in peace as they did in war. We must, and I believe we shall, prove ourselves equal to this severe requirement.

              When American military men approach some serious situation they are wont to write at the head of their directive the words "over-all strategic concept." There is wisdom in this, as it leads to clarity of thought. What then is the over-all strategic concept which we should inscribe today? It is nothing less than the safety and welfare, the freedom and progress, of all the homes and families of all the men and women in all the lands. And here I speak particularly of the myriad cottage or apartment homes where the wage-earner strives amid the accidents and difficulties of life to guard his wife and children from privation and bring the family up in the fear of the Lord, or upon ethical conceptions which often play their potent part.

              To give security to these countless homes, they must be shielded from the two giant marauders, war and tyranny. We all know the frightful disturbances in which the ordinary family is plunged when the curse of war swoops down upon the bread-winner and those for whom he works and contrives. The awful ruin of Europe, with all its vanished glories, and of large parts of Asia glares us in the eyes. When the designs of wicked men or the aggressive urge of mighty States dissolve over large areas the frame of civilised society, humble folk are confronted with difficulties with which they cannot cope. For them all is distorted, all is broken, even ground to pulp.

              When I stand here this quiet afternoon I shudder to visualise what is actually happening to millions now and what is going to happen in this period when famine stalks the earth. None can compute what has been called "the unestimated sum of human pain." Our supreme task and duty is to guard the homes of the common people from the horrors and miseries of another war. We are all agreed on that.

              Our American military colleagues, after having proclaimed their "over-all strategic concept" and computed available resources, always proceed to the next step-namely, the method. Here again there is widespread agreement. A world organisation has already been erected for the prime purpose of preventing war, UNO, the successor of the League of Nations, with the decisive addition of the United States and all that that means, is already at work. We must make sure that its work is fruitful, that it is a reality and not a sham, that it is a force for action, and not merely a frothing of words, that it is a true temple of peace in which the shields of many nations can some day be hung up, and not merely a cockpit in a Tower of Babel. Before we cast away the solid assurances of national armaments for self-preservation we must be certain that our temple is built, not upon shifting sands or quagmires, but upon the rock. Anyone can see with his eyes open that our path will be difficult and also long, but if we persevere together as we did in the two world wars-though not, alas, in the interval between them-I cannot doubt that we shall achieve our common purpose in the end.

              I have, however, a definite and practical proposal to make for action. Courts and magistrates may be set up but they cannot function without sheriffs and constables. The United Nations Organisation must immediately begin to be equipped with an international armed force. In such a matter we can only go step by step, but we must begin now. I propose that each of the Powers and States should be invited to delegate a certain number of air squadrons to the service of the world organisation. These squadrons would be trained and prepared in their own countries, but would move around in rotation from one country to another. They would wear the uniform of their own countries but with different badges. They would not be required to act against their own nation, but in other respects they would be directed by the world organisation. This might be started on a modest scale and would grow as confidence grew. I wished to see this done after the First World War, and I devoutly trust it may be done forthwith.

              具有政治意义的自由和民主的词汇我都标出来了,从数量上说是旗鼓相当。但是,从语义上说,标榜国家的修饰用的都是民主一词。

              丘吉尔发表铁幕演说的目的就是乞求以美国为首的西方国家一起围堵苏联,在这个意义上他三次提到“西方民主国家”/ Western Democracies 。对苏联的用语则是独裁者、寡头集团、警察政府.....,从没用民主来描绘过苏联,反倒是说“(东欧)除了捷克,没有真实的民主”。

              =========

              为什么会有“西方标榜自由”的说法?这个是不是来自文艺作品呢?早期的007系列电影就是这么个做法,常有忽悠人投奔自由世界的台词。文艺作品这么设计是因为,很多人都喜欢自由而不喜欢民主。

              票选民主的一个规则是少数者要认输。这个政治术语叫做“忠诚反对”。这个规则让人很不舒服(是啊,忙活半天却被人否定了,谁会舒服?)。每个人都有一个心魔——想干啥就干啥的”皇帝梦“,只有外界的压力才能抑制这个魔鬼。如果没有袁世凯被孙中山、冯国璋、蔡锷气死在前,蒋介石是一定想做皇帝的。

              丘吉尔曾经抱怨,自己刚带领英国人打赢了德国就被英国人抛弃了。这或多或少的说明丘吉尔自己也不喜欢民主而不自由的英国,只不过是没办法而已。

              通宝推:燕人,
分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 3
下页 末页


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河