Uterine Polyp,cramping And Bloating

The theoretical and practical democracy (part 2)

Time will courage! As mentioned in Part 1, is the democracy of the vital needs of humanity created for a just and secure society. The tool for the creation of theoretical democracy were primary sources. Among them is the Socratic dialogue, the active group communication or a simple lecture classes, so basically free communication technology. A strong influence on democracy and its current state, took the development of secondary and tertiary sources. This includes books, as well as television and radio. The similarities of these technical media are that they carry only one-sided information exchange. This bias has a strong influence on the communication in practical democracy. If one still brought capitalism, which was formed parallel to democracy in order to regulate trade, it appears that the more willing investors is the transmission of information. The result is a power structure that excludes alternative information indirectly.

has technologised But now the human race a quaternary medium developed that could serve as a tool in a democracy. The language of Web 2.0, or colloquially as the Internet. The WEB2.0 allowing two-way information transfer. At the same time but also it is contrary to any current rule of neo-liberalism and capitalism, since the dual exchange of information with high or not connected only with balanced costs. The consequences are that an individual is exposed to a flood of information. Since humans perceive different a medium, he begins to select. The longer this selection takes place and the individual deal with the WEB2.0 is, the more suspicious it is compared to the information brokers. The fatal consequences of this are that the trend decline for a just society. The Web2.0 is therefore a danger to the current democracies in the world. It changes the social setting, the collective Behavior and general knowledge.

allows the other hand, this form of dual communication, a detailed theoretical and faster implementation of democracy. The reason is obvious, since it is caused by primary sources (eg debate), that is also a form of dual communication. "Back to the roots."

Suitable examples are the websites that offer platforms to create social networks. There it is possible so-called communities (social groups) to join, or start new ones, to share his personal views and opinions. From collectivist motives and is decidedly non-capitalist democratic, whether this information is socially relevant. In summary, therefore, is that WEB2.0 may present a danger to the practice implemented in democracies, but at the same time it corrects the error mentioned. The danger, then only that the practical democracy slipping closer to the theoretical. Such an abnormal change makes the people to fear and anxiety also created mistrust of the new medium. But the time has come, now missing is the courage ...

end.

Trainer Für Mount & Blade 1.003 Deutsch

The theoretical and practical democracy (part 1)

The idea and theory of democracy means government decisions on cases is not bad. The rule on a state (territory, rights, laws, people, etc.) the to assign the affected individuals and local sounds almost utopian. But this is exactly the case in a democratic state.

A fatal error of democracy is the polyvalent definition of the people. It is necessary to meet conditions to be a member of a people, then the chooser as 18 years old and physically and psychologically vital. In addition, the chooser must have caused the local citizenship. These conditions already includes one of a few% of the people. Thus for instance, in Switzerland 20% of the people there by direct democratic decisions, because citizenship excluded. The minors are not the 20%. A Another fatal flaw of democracy is the freedom to choose or choose not. A case of fatal error in the Swiss canton of Aargau is visible. Just 31.7% went to the polls. In this case, a minority of representatives of the people ruling over a majority. This democratic decision is binding, this binding is a further error of democracy. Democracy in practice can not be mentioned because of these errors referred to as intact. It is and will remain so in theory. Consequently, all states would have to call themselves democratic, to be called again. For the description, I offer two suggestions:

first Plain and simple: "Theoretically democratic"

second This proposal is somewhat more complex. Political scientists, philosophers, lawyers and professors of economics, as well as psychologists and sociologists develop a checklist. This list consists of conditions that each country must meet to be allowed to call itself democratic. Of course, this checklist is based on the basic ideas and principles of democracy. It is also important that these experts do not work out of self interest (ie profit) to the list. An independent commission established using this checklist as a country is democratic and indicates a ranking in%. For example, it would then called "democratically to 65.4%," or "to 30.5% democratic" ... arose

It is so that democracy, living out of a healthy desire in a just society. Not the individual, but the collective striving for a just society. Of course there are alternatives to democracy, but they have to distinguish because of the free market economy, globalization and the blind trust in the capital is no chance. Finally, we have no choice but to accept democracy as it is. She is currently the "best" form of security in the pursuit of justice offers. I bin zuversichtlich und optimistisch, dass der Mensch diese selbst geschaffenen Fesseln eines Tages abgeben wird. Kommt Zeit, kommt Mut!