Didn't claim anything else worked either, please note. But among the causes I'd risk my life for, democracy is not to be found by the most microscopic search.

Time to try ailurocracy, perhaps.

You've just made that up! It's total discomtransposition.

Quote from: FierceKitty on 12 August 2014, 02:48:59 AM
Didn't claim anything else worked either, please note. But among the causes I'd risk my life for, democracy is not to be found by the most microscopic search.

Time to try ailurocracy, perhaps.

Ailurocracy, that gives one paws fur thought  

As a proud Scotsman (from Shetland, so I don't do kilts, haggis and bagpipes) who lives in England by accident of history, I note the divergence of the Scottish and Westminster governments. I also see, on my many trips to Scotland, a country where there is  a feeling of a national identity that is absent in England. Count the Saltires proudly waving all year long, and not just when there's international football on (in which case they'd never be aired).

Scotland is already achieving independence from Westminster bit by bit. Apart from foreign and defence policies, and some taxation which Mr Darling has promised to transfer, Scotland is largely self governing. I see the independence campaign as a shunning of Westminster (not England and that other place ... Walls, Wells, something like that) rather than a desire to destroy the Union.

If a fairly socialist party, like say the Labour party before that nice Mr Blair mucked it up, got elected as the Government of the UK, and re-evaluated our place in the world, I think that the  ardour for Scottish independence would be cooled. If this New New Labour scrapped Trident, wouldn't that cut one of the hairy wee legs of Alex Salmond? It's a waste of money any way as they proved in "Yes Prime Minister" thirty years ago ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_d_vMKswE

While France has ballistic missile submarines, so will we. Would the navy have got new aircraft carriers before the advent of the Charles de Gaulle? I think not.

Democracy may or may not be the best form of government, but it's certainly the least bad.

The development of democracy in Europe over the past 200 years or so has been in parallel with a more tollerant, open and inclusive society.  Unfortunately most people forget that democracy was hard fought for and is a prize worth having.  If you don't have democracy what have you got?  Tyrany in one form or another, be it a monarchy or some other form of dictatorship, religious or secular.

The bad reputation of democracy seems to come from the West imposing it on people who take the concept but create parties based arround nationalistic, ethnic, tribal, religious or some other insular grouping.  The result is factionalism which often leads to one group dominating the others and using their inbuilt powerbase to further their personal and supporters welfare at the cost of everyone else, eventually the result is civil war.

Western democracy works because there is much less of that factionism, the exception being Northern Ireland which witnessed exactly the above senario (based on religious bigotry) from Partition to the instigation of the Goodfriday Agreement and we're still living with that legacy and probably will be for decades.

For the rest of Britain democracy works because there are enough posh people who don't automatically vote Tory, enough working class people who don't automatically vote labour and a big swathe in the midddle who tip the balance from one to the other to ensure that the difference between Left and Right in Westminster is relatively small.  The extremists on either end of the spectrum are tolerated but not able to break the balance too much.

Nationalism is, by it's very nature, small minded, factional and devisive.  Most Eupopean countries, including Britain, have, over the years elected govenerments with some sort of 'nationalist' bias, and generally the result has been, to say the least, unhappy.  But European democracy developed and since 1945 nationalism has generally been out of favour, giving us 70 years of peace and unparalleled prosperity.  You may or may not agree with everything 'Europe' says and does but the more or less united Europe of 2014 is a much safer, tolerant and prosperous place than the nationalistic Europe of 1914.

So while I wouldn't fight for democracy as an abstract concept I'd be the first on the baracades if David Cameron disolved Parliament and tried to grab power.

"Count the saltires proudly waving all year." Now where was that European country in the 1930s where you couldn't turn a corner without seeing their flag "proudly waving all year." My GOD I'm bloody sick of this nationalism. You'd think as wargamers we'd see how counter-productive it is.

Oh, yes, certainly the best. It gave us Hitler, Reagan, the Bushes, Thatchler, the Shinawatras. What could be better than a system that gives power to those voted in by telling the mass of people what they want to hear and are certainly not qualified to understand? I include myself in that category, btw.

Quote from: FierceKitty on 12 August 2014, 10:13:23 AM
Oh, yes, certainly the best. It gave us Hitler, Reagan, the Bushes, Thatchler, the Shinawatras. What could be better than a system that gives power to those voted in by telling the mass of people what they want to hear and are certainly not qualified to understand? I include myself in that category, btw.

I think that is largely the point of what makes democracy worth it. You need to get the mass of people to vote for you. This ensures that you do not go to war for "silly" reasons. You can argue this point but as war-gamers most of us will read history and if we look at the reasons Kings and Emperors went to war the "declare war" threshold was a lot lower than in a mature democracy.

In your leader list Hitler should not be there in my opinion as he was elected by an immature democracy. You might have added Blair, Brown and Wilson for balance.

Democracy is a very long way from being ideal but it ensures we have a good debate on important matters and although we do not vote on everything "public opinion" does carry weight in political circles.

Cheers  Rob

It's very easy to assume a king goes to war because he's personally ambitious or needs to gain a reputation or is paranoid, and that only autocrats do so. But ask anyone who remembers Thatchler and and the Falklands, or any US president and any place where they wear turbans....

It gave us Hitler, Reagan, the Bushes, Thatcher, the Shinawatras but not Pol Pot, Caligula, Papa Doc, Idi Amin or Qin Shi Huang.

The suggestion is not that Democracy is necessarily good merely that the alternatives are worse.

Democracy did give us Hitler who was a nationalist and who then prodeded democracy in Germany, he was eventually beaten by Russia, the USA and the Britain, two of whom were and still are democracies.  I may be wrong, but I suspect Europe under a totalitarian nationalistic regime would not be as nice a place to live as it is under it's current rather ramshacled democracies.

The power of Democracy is not only in the vote of the individual but in the power of the law, all of the above were subject to the law, Regan didn't try and grab a third term as president and Thatcher at least was answerable to Parliament and there was a public enquiry after the Falklands.

And if you don't think democracy works what about the Vietnam War?  Wilson refused to get drawn into that one despite a lot of pressure as he knew there was no was he could get Parliament or the people to agree.  And the USA pulled out of Vietnam not because it was loosing but because of the political pressure at home, pressure which would not have existed if the US hadn't been a democracy.

Also, the single biggest upheaval in the US since the civil war, the civil rights movement of the 1960s was only achievable because the US was a democracy. 

Quote from: Dour Puritan on 12 August 2014, 10:07:04 AM
My GOD I'm bloody sick of this nationalism.

Think of it as "community".

"Patriotism is, fundamentally, a conviction that a particular country is the best in the world because you were born in it...."
― George Bernard Shaw

When I look at the mess that has been made in places like Afganistan and Iraq, by trying to give them democracy. I do wonder if they were not better when ruled by a Dictator or the Taliban.

Yes we might not agree with thier laws,or the oppression of women or some parts of the population, but less peple seemed to end up dead on a daily basis.

They do not seem to be ready for democracy and would probably be better off under an autocracy.