Democracy cannot live without Capitalism?

[Da Skinna]

Hmm?

[The Friend]

I would say yes. Democracy as we understand is about a right of an individual. The foremost right being able to say No. The freedom to refuse, to choose and to opine. And that is exactly what Capitalism is all about. It is an economy of choice.

I would say Capitalism is an economic manifestation of Democratic form of Government.

[sirfiggin]

probably not late capitalism- too much capital in fewer people's hands tends to give them too much power to allow their fellow citizens any feeling of equality

[The Friend]

probably not late capitalism- too much capital in fewer people's hands tends to give them too much power to allow their fellow citizens any feeling of equality

Democracy is not about promoting equality of consumption. It is about equality of treatment by the Government , equality of opinion in Governance.

One key tenet of democracy is to give everyone the opportunity to rise. Some may be able to use it and some may not.But its the opportunity thats democracy is al about. It is this point where capitalism scores as the democratic form of Economy.

[spartan117]

Authoritarianism can certainly exist with different economic systems but Democracy cant exist without a free market economy. When it does, it often tends to become authoritarian itself.

Maximilan can you give examples when we had a successful democracy with a socialist system ? By successful I mean, a true democracy (holding elections is not the only criterion for democracy IMO)

A socialist system? What is that?

Even in the US there are socialist domestic programs. Countries in Europe have a bunch of socialist programs.

Democracy is not about promoting equality of consumption. It is about equality of treatment by the Government , equality of opinion in Governance.

One key tenet of democracy is to give everyone the opportunity to rise. Some may be able to use it and some may not.But its the opportunity thats democracy is al about. It is this point where capitalism scores as the democratic form of Economy.

equality in opinion of government? That is up for debate. I surely dont have equal say then that of wealthy people.

Wealthy people can donate much more money to candidates and have the means to gather large groups of people into voting blocs. So their influence in the outcome of an election is greater then my one vote. A candidate will likely try to appeal to their opinions rather then my one vote.

Opportunities are not the same. People born of families living in housing projects do not have the same opportunities of one born of a much wealthier family. government aid is meant to ease the difficulties and increase the opportunities.(a socialist program) I am not arguing for the effectiveness of such programs or that the opportunities should be "equal" but merely stating opportunities are not equal among the different social classes.

[The Friend]

Well I meant a socialist economy as opposed to a free market capitalist economy.

It simple in my opinion. if A excels , A would want to get the fruits of it. And it may or may not be to his liking to see B sharing the fruits of his success because some authority decides that B's need is more than A's.
The moment you force A to do that, you destroy his urge to excel.

The may or may not part is important here. It is precisely this choice of A's which a democracy has to uphold.

As I posted in another thread, Ayn Rand's Atlas shrugged is an excellent read in this regard. It is very pertinent in my opinion.

[Code_Knight]

Hmm?

Democracy works with Capitalism, but It also works with the U.S. which is a Democratic-Republic. So in other words, Capitalism works because of individual rights.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

Democracy works with Capitalism, but It also works with the U.S. which is a Democratic-Republic. So in other words, Capitalism works because of individual rights.

The US is a Federal Republic actually.

[Code_Knight]

The US is a Federal Republic actually.

ah thanks.

I had an argument with several different people the other day, they were saying that America is a democracy and I was saying it is a Republic, did anyone else here learn that America is a democracy?

[MaximiIian]

Hmm?

I would say no. Democracy can certainly exist in various kinds of economic systems, from capitalism, to mixed, and even socialism. Likewise, authoritarianism can also coexist with various kinds of economic models.

...they were saying that America is a democracy and I was saying it is a Republic, did anyone else here learn that America is a democracy?

What I learned is that a Republic is a form of representative democracy. The United States is a federal republic, specifically one which each federal entity is itself a republic, which makes up part of a larger, federative, republic.

So, while not exactly coterminous, it's not inaccurate to call the United States a democracy. Just not a direct democracy.

[The Friend]

I would say no. Democracy can certainly exist in various kinds of economic systems, from capitalism, to mixed, and even socialism. Likewise, authoritarianism can also coexist with various kinds of economic models.

Authoritarianism can certainly exist with different economic systems but Democracy cant exist without a free market economy. When it does, it often tends to become authoritarian itself.

Maximilan can you give examples when we had a successful democracy with a socialist system ? By successful I mean, a true democracy (holding elections is not the only criterion for democracy IMO)

[Kiljan Arslan]

LOL! Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged is nothing more then a bunch of badly written essays poorly disguised as a novel. BTW Ayn Rand was a hypocrite she thought it was perfectly fine for the white man to have taken the native Americans private property. Because the white man could "do more" with it. Plus for all of her detesting of the poor and detesting giving to the weak even as charity, she spent her first five years i the US doing that.

[Aziel]

LOL! Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged is nothing more then a bunch of badly written essays poorly disguised as a novel. BTW Ayn Rand was a hypocrite she thought it was perfectly fine for the white man to have taken the native Americans private property. Because the white man could "do more" with it. Plus for all of her detesting of the poor and detesting giving to the weak even as charity, she spent her first five years i the US doing that.

Although I think her philosophy is wrong, I disagree with you that her novels are badly written.

[MaximiIian]

Although I think her philosophy is wrong, I disagree with you that her novels are badly written.

They are long, contrived, and boring. Oh, and did I mention LONG.
Rand was a sociopathic betch, and her books suck balls.

A Republic is not a Democracy
Republic only means that the head of State is not a Monarch

A republic is simply a representative democracy. It is a form of democratic government. "Democracy" =/= "Direct Democracy".
This is evidenced by the fact that the word res publica means "a thing of the people" in Latin.

And, second of all, a republic doesn't necessarily mean that the head of state is not a monarch. I consider Japan, for instance, to be a "Crowned Republic", that is to say a nominal constitutional monarchy with a republican government structure.

[Chlodwig I.]

A Republic is not a Democracy
Republic only means that the head of State is not a Monarch

Iran, North Korea, USA, France are all Republics
but not all of them are Democracies.


Democracy can work without free market economy...

but a free market economy can destroy a democracy
like it happend in Germany after WW2

[Kiljan Arslan]

Atlas shrugged is one of the worst books out there. IN my opinion.