andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 21-12-2010 19:34, Warp wrote:
> > andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
> >> I am just describing what happens in practice. If you don't like it for
> >> philosophical reasons, try to find another planet to live on.
> >
> >    Why? The whole idea with democracy is that the people can affect the
> > politics of their society. If you perceive something as being wrong with
> > society, you don't fix it by conforming and just accepting it as something
> > inevitable. You fix it by voting. (Of course there has to be a few other
> > people who also vote like that, but that's the basic principle in democracy.)

> I think it is a common concept that a democracy has to do what the 
> majority wants while at the same time protecting the rights of minorities.

  While protecting the rights of *everybody* equally.

> >    Your expression sounds like "this is how things are, and there's nothing
> > you can do to change it, so learn to live with it". No, that's not how
> > democracy works. We are lucky enough to live in democratic countries, and
> > we should use the possibilities that brings us to better the society.
> >
> >    The moment when people start believing that they cannot affect their
> > society is the moment when the whole idea of democracy has been destroyed.
> > (Unfortunately this is a way too common belief.)

> It is not that I think I cannot change it, I don't *want* to change it.

  Then we disagree. As long as there is preferential treatment, double
standards and discrimination (there's no such a thing as "positive
discrimination", that's a ridiculous oxymoron), no society can be truly
free and equal.

> >    *Why* does the minority need special protection?

> because it is a minority and can be outvoted in a 'democracy'. Simple as 
> that.

  Minorities require extra protection and preferential treatment because
they can be outvoted in a democracy? And exactly how does that solve
anything? And how does that argument make any sense? By the same reasoning
advocates of a minority political party should get special protection and
preferential treatment because they are outvoted by the advocates of the
larger parties. You don't see that happening, and for good reason.

  I also like how you quote 'democracy', as to imply that there's something
wrong with the whole concept.

> > Why are double standards necessary?

> I would not call them 'double standards', you do.

  Maybe you don't, but that doesn't change the fact.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message