Democracy, Now I see why Plato didn't like it

Let me start out by saying, I still beleive that Democracy is the best form of goverment out there but, I now see its flaw… its one big flaw…

Plato said

Democracy is the rule of the majority for the majority

And now I see whats wrogn with it.

As I was reading over the facts on Iraq, and its cultural conflict, I noticed that the highest precentage of people is Shi ites muslims over 60%. Before they were not in control of the country and will dominate.

Now, if iraq is left to control itself, the Shiites will gain total control of the country. Judging by the cultural conflict, they will rule for themselves mostly. And because they are religiously motivated they will probobly try to always be in control, as well as maybe bringing in releigous laws to the country, much like Saudi Arabia.

Also because the country is so clanish (again because of cultural conflict) I dont see them opening up and stabalizing between cultures, most likley Shiites will always remain shiites, and Kurds will always be Kurds…etc…

So in the end , even after guerrila warfare ends.(??) I think that there will be conflict between the cultural groups, and even result in civil war. Considering that the Sunni have been in control, they would probobly have alot of educated people, and this will create tension between other groups…

Basicaly, Shiites are 60% of the population, Sunni are 17% kurds are 20% and there is another random 3%… that means even if the other groups combinded (which would never happened) They would still not challange the Shiites!

So it was best to just leave Saddam in power? Is that what you’re saying?

I see your point, there is potential for much resistance in the nation, and much civil unrest. However, I don’t quite see where you’re going with this post.

If I were a betting man, I’d bet this was a shot at the war in Iraq, and an indirect shot at the G.W. administration.

Why can’t everyone face the fact that, while life might not be perfect after Saddam, it’s certainly better than when he was in power. Didn’t the whole world think that the Colonies would be torn apart after the Revolutionary War? Countries were lining up waiting to come back in and take over after the whole thing fell … but we didn’t!

Who’s to say that the same won’t happen with Iraq?

No, thats not my point. As the topic suggest. Its my view of what the flaw in democracy is.

Of why, it might not work there. Because the Majority will rule for themselves…

Your off topic dude, I was just explaining why and how it is.

If you want to discuss your view go to the “Administration is calling Iraq a vicotry” thread, we have some good ideas there.

Of course the views of the majority will be dominant! My problem with that statement is your belief that democracy is less likely to succeed in Iraq than anywhere else in the world. The same problem exists in America. Check the races of the governors and see how that shapes up proportionally with our nation’s demographics. Iraq may have its issues trying to get a democracy started but if they want one they can get it done.

The United States does have a democracy, just not a direct democracy. Canada is considered a constitutional monarchy, but we are democratic, people vote for representatives who in turn are supposed to vote in a minimized version of a direct democracy.

There are flaws with democracy, and another flaw is that it rarely works. While democracy is the fastest spreading form of government, most of the countries becoming “democracies” are too corrupt to really represent the people. I think the problem is that democracy cannot just come out of no where and work, it will usually fall back into a dictatorship (for example, Nigeria, and many other former colonies.

And I had to sneak this in, because no one is replying to “the war is now a sucess for the administration” I find it funny that i heard some republican senators saying that “the US has been shouldering almost all the costs of the anti-terrorist effort, and it’s time for the rest of the world to pay their share.” It seems less and less like the US had a plan for when they had Iraq, did they not expect it to cost this much? HOw could they have miscalculated by this much? If they wanted other countries to help shoulder the bill, maybe they shouldn’t have decided to act without the other countries, maybe they shouldn’t have started a war they can’t afford.