the principle by which society is held together, requires that the majority of opinions becomes the rule for the whole, and that the minority yields practical obedience thereto --- if only
On Oct 2, 10:39 am, LimboIndo <[email protected]> wrote: > Thomas Paine Dissertations on First Principles of > Governmenthttp://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/paine_dissertations_on_first_... > > In all matters of opinion, the social compact, or the principle by > which society is held together, requires that the majority of opinions > becomes the rule for the whole, and that the minority yields practical > obedience thereto. This is perfectly conformable to the principle of > equal rights: for, in the first place, every man has a right to give > an opinion but no man has a right that his opinion should govern the > rest. In the second place, it is not supposed to be known beforehand > on which side of any question, whether for or against, any man's > opinion will fall. He may happen to be in a majority upon some > questions, and in a minority upon others; and by the same rule that he > expects obedience in the one case, he must yield it in the other. > > On Oct 2, 9:35 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > plainolamerican > > the point is that (imo) democracy is not the best system > > Sheldon Richman > > I mean something else: Why should the people get something through > > government–that is, at the point of a gun–simply because they want it? We > > make that assumption reflexively, but why? Fifty-seven percent may be > > willing to pay higher taxes for universal health insurance, but let’s not > > overlook what else they are willing to do:tax the 37 percent > > whoaren’twilling to pay higher taxes.(Six percent don’t know if they are > > willing or not.Sigh.) > > H. L. Mencken long ago defined democracy as the “the theory that the common > > people know what they want, and deserve to get itgood and hard.”The problem > > is that those whodon’twant it get it, too. When it comes to government > > programs, there’s no opt-out provision. Alas, what distinguishes “free” > > from unfree countries is the freedom tospeakout, not tooptout. In the > > latter respect, all are unfree. > > What about that 37 percent who would be ignored? If they don’t count, they > > needn’t have had their time wasted by the pollster. AsBruno Leoniwrote, > > “[I]n assuming that 51 voters out of 100 are ‘politically’ equal to 100 > > voters, and that the remaining 49 (contrary) voters are ‘politically’ equal > > to zero (which is exactly what happens when a group decision is made > > according to majority rule) we give much more ‘weight’ to each voter > > ranking on the side of the winning 51 than to each voter ranking on the > > side of the losing 49.” (See my article“The Crazy Arithmetic of Voting.”) > > Well, it might be said, in our system the majority rules. Standing alone, > > this principle sounds rather ominous, so the speaker usually hastens to > > add, “but the rights of the minority are protected.” But really now, which > > is it? Do the majority rule or are the rights of the minority protected? I > > really don’t see how you can have it both ways.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
