What matters is not how the government is doing but how the people are doing.
Paper prosperity means nothing when you are unhappy. When you have a mind but must not express it.
The people of China are in bondage. The shocking reality behind this "prosperity" will one day be revealed.

You said democracy brings economic prosperity. I simply said that was bollocks and gave an example of why. I never said China had happy and free citizens, I was strictly talking about economic prosperity and how it has nothing to do with democracy. You think the UK is a REAL democracy? Yet they are doing well economically as well. Oh, plus people are flocking their from all over the world for job opportunities. Democracy doesnt equal economic prosperity. The fact isnt that hard to understand except you are dim witted.

You said democracy brings economic prosperity.

That's a false accusation. I did not say any such thing. Entrepreneurship is what brings properity.

Mariory:

That's exactly what I mean.

You may wish to educate me and tell me exactly how communism means a non democratic state.

I await your enlightening definition and explanation

Just found this,

Historically, the word "communism" may be used to refer to several types of communal social organization and their supporters, but, since the mid-19th century, the dominant school of communism in the world has been Marxism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communism

It doesn't say it's opposed to democracy

Democracy certainly is not universally beneficial and a few pointers will attest to this.

Democracy brought about the present leaderships in Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, Russia, Afghanistan etc.

In South America (continent) a lot of leftist presidents are springing up and these people are democractically elected, not thorugh coups.

Even in the US, democracy as is practiced today seems to be giving room for a lot of things that are even immoral.

Gays and lesbians are asking for equal rights even when God created Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve.

If democracy is exported to the middle east today, countries like Saudi Arabia will gladly shut their oil taps against the US and we all know what the consequences of such actions will be.

For the simple fact that people are different, democracy as practiced by one country should not be made universal and the recent push for such universal adoption has recorded unexpected scenarios with a free and fair election bringing a Hamas led government that clearly says they do not want Israel to exist, same with Iran where the present president won by basing his campaign on anti western propaganda as against the former president that was leaning towards the West.

In Nigeria today, democracy has destabilized well organised institutions that have survived thousands of years without problems. The Ibos naturally do not believe in kingship whereas the Hausas believe in kingships where a single person has a near total control over the people under him.

The "red indians" were living a happy life before the invaders came, killed, maimed and established themselves on another man's land. Not sure they were practicing democracy then but I assume they were happy and living in peace, at least Columbus recorded that as one of the things that shocked him when he stepped foot on their land.

It is best for countries to develop the best style of governance that suits them, not trying to import another person's way of life.

Democracy is just a game of numbers and has nothing to do with morality just as 90% of a group may decide to pass into law something that is bad and it becomes law because in democracy majority will always have their way while minority their say.

Afam:

Democracy certainly is not universally beneficial and a few pointers will attest to this.

Democracy brought about the present leaderships in Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, Russia, Afghanistan etc.

In South America (continent) a lot of leftist presidents are springing up and these people are democractically elected, not thorugh coups.

Even in the US, democracy as is practiced today seems to be giving room for a lot of things that are even immoral.

Gays and lesbians are asking for equal rights even when God created Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve.

If democracy is exported to the middle east today, countries like Saudi Arabia will gladly shut their oil taps against the US and we all know what the consequences of such actions will be.

For the simple fact that people are different, democracy as practiced by one country should not be made universal and the recent push for such universal adoption has recorded unexpected scenarios with a free and fair election bringing a Hamas led government that clearly says they do not want Israel to exist, same with Iran where the present president won by basing his campaign on anti western propaganda as against the former president that was leaning towards the West.

In Nigeria today, democracy has destabilized well organised institutions that have survived thousands of years without problems. The Ibos naturally do not believe in kingship whereas the Hausas believe in kingships where a single person has a near total control over the people under him.

The "red indians" were living a happy life before the invaders came, killed, maimed and established themselves on another man's land. Not sure they were practicing democracy then but I assume they were happy and living in peace, at least Columbus recorded that as one of the things that shocked him when he stepped foot on their land.

It is best for countries to develop the best style of governance that suits them, not trying to import another person's way of life.

Democracy is just a game of numbers and has nothing to do with morality just as 90% of a group may decide to pass into law something that is bad and it becomes law because in democracy majority will always have their way while minority their say.

Afam thank you very much for your wonderful comment, couldnt have butressed it any further

Easyy:

You may wish to educate me and tell me exactly how communism means a non democratic state.

I await your enlightening definition and explanation

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Afam:

Democracy is just a game of numbers and has nothing to do with morality just as 90% of a group may decide to pass into law something that is bad and it becomes law because in democracy majority will always have their way while minority their say.

And what makes you think non-democratic societies are moral? Don't be so naive. A very immoral person can also seize power (several examples of such people in Africa in the past decade) and do what he likes. The difference with democracy is that you will have a say in whether someone you disagree with stays in power.
You folks are forgetting that no one is saying democracy is perfect. What is being said is that it is the best form of government whatever your ideas or beliefs.

@Mariory,

And what makes you think non-democratic societies are moral? Don't be so naive.

I never stated that non democratic societies are moral. What are you getting at, manufacturing statements so you can go personal? Won't work now and won't work ever.

Meanwhile, being naive may be better than being stupid.

Afam:

@Mariory,

I never stated that non democratic societies are moral. What are you getting at, manufacturing statements so you can go personal? Won't work now and won't work ever.

Ignoring irrelevant ranting, What was your basis of then saying demorcracy is giving way to things that are immoral? Of course in comparison with other government systems?

Mariory:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism

------------------------------------------------------------------------
And what makes you think non-democratic societies are moral? Don't be so naive. A very immoral person can also seize power (several examples of such people in Africa in the past decade) and do what he likes. The difference with democracy is that you will have a say in whether someone you disagree with stays in power.
You folks are forgetting that no one is saying democracy is perfect. What is being said is that it is the best form of government whatever your ideas or beliefs.

You have brought me a definition well tailored to mean what some want it to mean. Did you also see it defined as follows?

A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

Nothing there about authoritarianism.

Westerners are very good are twisting definitions to mean what suits them generally.

Mariory,

I'll leave the issue of communism to discuss the way America is trying to force it's own type of democracy upon the rest of the world.

@Mariory,

Go ahead with you diversionary tactics let those that choose to discuss the real issues continue.

A poser!How many countries are still communist apart from the regimes in Beijing, Pyongyang?
What happened to their former comrades?What is on ground now?There's no ideal Government,no Utopia so to say only the best form of governance-democracy
History tell us that Marx, Engles and Lenin had a brilliant plan to make all the workers of the world equal but those 'prodigal sons that took it upon themselves to be missionaries failed woefully- Stalin and his successors,Chairman Mao,the revolutionaries in Africa etc!
China has the fastest growing economy in the world because the Communist party relaxed rules on enterpreneurship and private ownership of property. So Fortune 500 companies, High Street etc have all flocked to China. It's still somewhat communist but not totally!
Not to be mistaken i've said that the US isn't the model of democracyShe is not!Blacks started voting less than 4 decades ago so i don't share the noise about being the bastion of democracy!A nation that invades other nations, topples governments and kidnaps them all in the name of national security!Look towards Europe as i said Denmark, Belgium , Finland, Estonia, Latvia and see the gospel of democracy!
Communism isn't a government you choose!Rather unpopular and the experiment failed after 70 years!

Easyy:

You have brought me a definition well tailored to mean what some want it to mean. Did you also see it defined as follows?

A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

Nothing there about authoritarianism.

Westerners are very good are twisting definitions to mean what suits them generally.

History (factual history) records communist governments as being authoritative. That's besides the point though. Look at the definition in your quote. And then remember what I said about a perfect world. See what I mean?

Mariory:

History (factual history) records communist governments as being authoritative. That's besides the point though. Look at the definition in your quote. And then remember what I said about a perfect world. See what I mean?

Knowing the source of 'history' helps to determine what kind of slant/spin would have been applied to such. Historical documents tend to sometimes differ depending upon who recorded the 'facts'.

I dont see what you mean

Easyy:

Knowing the source of 'history' helps to determine what kind of slant/spin would have been applied to such. Historical documents tend to sometimes differ depending upon who recorded the 'facts'.

Okay then forget history. Let us judge Communism on what we know to be true. What we see with our own eyes in our own time. We see that communists governments everywhere are authoritative. Thats fact.

Easyy:

I don't see what you mean

Yes you do.

Mariory:

Okay then forget history. Let us judge Communism on what we know to be true. What we see with our own eyes in our own time. We see that communists governments everywhere are authoritative. Thats fact.
Yes you do.

even when parliaments are working in such countries?

In what country? Who elects members of the parliaments?

Now about the challenge

There is democracy in Communist China. You can chose to say they are repressive BUT they are still elected by the people and there is the presence of a parliament. I got the follwing information off the net

There is more thn one party, though the communist party is the majority, and so they have all the say

Direct elections in the People's Republic of China take two forms: elections for village leader in selected rural villages and elections for local people congresses. Each people's congress then conducts an election for the next higher level of people's congress, culminating in elections for the national legislature: the National People's Congress (Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui). The NPC has 2,979 members, elected for five year terms. Deputies are elected (over a three month period) by the people's congresses of the country's 23 provinces, five autonomous regions and the four municipalities directly under the Central Government, the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau and the armed forces. The size of each college of delegates is related to the number of electors in the constituency. 36 deputies are elected in Hong Kong.

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061009021427AAG6gPk

oh common now. Let's not get carried away. China is not demorcratic. It is a one party state. With a population of 1.3 billion, there are only 7.9 million or so registered voters. None of those voters get to select the president or vice president. There are indeed other political parties in China, but they only participate in the People's Political Consultative Conference, which endorses Communist party of China's (CPC) policies.

China is run by three seats of power. The State Apparatus, the People's Liberation Army, and the CPC.

From the same link you posted.
The President and vice president are elected by the National People's Congress for five-year terms. The people do not get a chance to vote at all. The National People's Congress membership is still largely determined by the Communist Party of China.

If you are a member of the communist party, you can vote for who will represent you in Beijing. Its more of a relationship kind of thing than a real democratic process. No one with truly independent ideas may run, and no one who is not a member of the communist party can be elected. It is a one party state, and it is still largely run by the military.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-party_state (see links at the bottom for more info.)

If China is not democratic, Nigeria is not democratic neither is America or even UK for that matter.

In China, the President and Vice President are not directly elected. In Nigeria, no one elects the ministers, same applies to America. Every nation should decide the best way to form it's own government rather than being forced to do things the way America wants it done.

It's not that simple. The people of Iraq were not free to decide on what type of government they wanted. You seem to be forgetting how dictators operate. Anyone making noise about a new government is simply executed.

About China, read this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989 (a massacre)

Seun:

It's not that simple. The people of Iraq were not free to decide on what type of government they wanted. You seem to be forgetting how dictators operate. Anyone making noise about a new government is simply executed.

About China, read this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989 (a massacre)

Are the people of Iraq now free to decide what type of government they want?

Seun:

It's not that simple. The people of Iraq were not free to decide on what type of government they wanted. You seem to be forgetting how dictators operate. Anyone making noise about a new government is simply executed.

About China, read this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989 (a massacre)

Iraqis were told what type of government they were getting and they were just to go and vote. They had no say in what type of government they get. They can only influence the personality make up of the government, not the type of government.

Easyy:

If China is not democratic, Nigeria is not democratic neither is America or even UK for that matter.

In China, the President and Vice President are not directly elected. In Nigeria, no one elects the ministers, same applies to America. Every nation should decide the best way to form it's own government rather than being forced to do things the way America wants it done.

Look no offense but, you starting to sound ridiculous. In China, the people do not decide who leads them. The Communist party does. Nigeria, UK, and US are not one party states. I don't know what they hell ministers have got to do with this. Since when have ministers ever been elected anywhere?

I know the truth is hard to accept for those who love to hate America. Face it, their form of government (Demorcracy) is the best of the bunch and it is spreading. It's only a matter of time before China joins the club.

There's no instance where democracy will not be beneficial if it is practiced properly. Democracy is only as good as it is practiced, so you cannot say we have democracy in Nigeria because what we are practicing is not democracy. Atleast not democracy as I know it.

Donzman, thanks for clarifying that we have no democracy in Nigeria. Why has George 'war monger' Bush not taken it upon himself to attack Nigeria for having a dictatorial leader?

I hope it's not because many american companies are very free to explore/exploit Nigeria's resources. Discussion for somewhere else.

Mariory:

Look no offense but, you starting to sound ridiculous. In China, the people do not decide who leads them. The Communist party does. Nigeria, UK, and US are not one party states. I don't know what they hell ministers have got to do with this. Since when have ministers ever been elected anywhere?

I know the truth is hard to accept for those who love to hate America. Face it, their form of government (Demorcracy) is the best of the bunch and it is spreading. It's only a matter of time before China joins the club.

Now you are coming out with what you really have inside you.

you believe that what should be practised is what is being practised by some other nation. Democracy should be a system where citizens elect those who have the rule over them. So why does one person have the powers to SELECT ministers who take decisions about the way our lives are lived? why dont we get to elect ministers who make policy decisions?

The point is that there is no perfect democracy anywhere in the world.

You would rather want everyone to practise what is practised in the US. That's why you ask 'since when have ministers been elected anywhere?' It should not be about what is done anywhere but about what works for every country.

If you practice a style of Government simply because that is what works elsewhere, you may find yourself in trouble. I think that's one of the main problems with Nigeria.

We had the Idiagbon regime which, in my opinion, was what we needed at that point in Nigeria to stem the tide of rot which was engulfing us but a number of westernised people thought it was a dictatorial regime (my parents also thought so). Look where we are now! The Idiagbon regime may have succeeded in changing our mindset for the better but now the average Nigerian has a corrupt mindset and sees corruption as a necessity to move ahead.

We got a democracy which our mentality was not able to cope with. LOOK AT US NOW

The Idiagbon regime may have succeeded in changing our mindset for the better

He would only have succeeded in killing all those who dare to oppose him. Progress isn't something you impose.

Seun:

He would only have succeeded in killing all those who dare to oppose him. Progress isn't something you impose.

How do you know that? He may have succeded in cleansing us of the evil of corruption. Or are you one of the beneficiaries of the corruption of that era?