Belarus Protesters

[rolf]

In that case I don't see what your point was or is. Why compare them? Their both on ends on the political spectrum. Also, most were not arrested for disturbing the peace, but death threats.They were commonly displayed at public protests. I support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who threatens our president. The threats all on its own is a federal crime, according to the United States Code. They don't released them quite fast. You can have a protest without calling forth the death of somebody.

The comparison is that protests against the leadership are normal. And yes, you can protest without death threats. Yes, I can (although I don't protests. The Dutch government takes 5 years to change a law, and they are only allowed to sit for 4 years before election, yeey bureaucracy).

 

But saying almost all arrests were because of the death threads, I don't buy that. I have to read some stuff about that first, but I'll come back to that later. Bedtime first

 

Personally, I think President Bush was evil. The Patriot Act does a great deal of damage to Free Speech, Habeas Corpus, Privacy, pretty much the entire Constitution. Pretty much the Patriot Act gave Bush the same power as the dictator, he just didn't use them.

I don't live in the US, so I don't have a lot to do with the Patriot Act. But a nice example, in 2008, your country had about 2,200 telephone taps (with 300M inhabitants), where my country has 26,425 (with 16M). Personally I have never felt any damage in Free Speech of Privacy, for one small exception. If I say (type) something, I know it can be used against me. But that is my problem with the internet in general, not with the patriot act. I'm not scared for the government either, just for a next boss or something. It just holds me from writing things politically incorrectly. Instead of "X s%cks", I rather write "I don't agree with X on some of his opinions". For over telephone (telephone taps), I just don't care. Never did, never will.

 

For Habeas Corpus (and I think you mean, among others, Guantanamo Bay) I fully agree with you. To quote Winston Churchill "You can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners."

 

I think the Gov't is not the solution to our problems but the whole Gov't is the problem.

The government system is no longer controlled by "we, the people." Instead "of the people, by the people, and for the people," we now have a government "of the people, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats."

 

I think an anarchy is worse and people are incompetent, so we actually need an government. How the US government operate, I can't tell exactly. However, as I said before, democracy is not the perfect situation. We want that everything which has to be decided, is actually the opinion of many people. But because people can't see the difference between what's good for themselves and what is good for the country, we need the government to balance that. But since everybody votes for "me me me", we get an !@#$ at bureaucracy. Because what is good for me, is not good for you, so we need an bureaucrat to find the best solution for us. We complain if it takes 4 years, but we also complain if it takes 2 days, because you can't have observed every useless detail in 2 days.

 

Well good luck with that, we're tired of policing the world. I believe the world can solve their problems without us.

I wish I could say the same. But not only the people in my country are stupid, also people in other countries are stupid, and sometimes they need our help

[Pici]

The comparison is that protests against the leadership are normal. And yes, you can protest without death threats. Yes, I can (although I don't protests. The Dutch government takes 5 years to change a law, and they are only allowed to sit for 4 years before election, yeey bureaucracy).

 

But saying almost all arrests were because of the death threads, I don't buy that. I have to read some stuff about that first, but I'll come back to that later. Bedtime first

 

 

I don't live in the US, so I don't have a lot to do with the Patriot Act. But a nice example, in 2008, your country had about 2,200 telephone taps (with 300M inhabitants), where my country has 26,425 (with 16M). Personally I have never felt any damage in Free Speech of Privacy, for one small exception. If I say (type) something, I know it can be used against me. But that is my problem with the internet in general, not with the patriot act. I'm not scared for the government either, just for a next boss or something. It just holds me from writing things politically incorrectly. Instead of "X s%cks", I rather write "I don't agree with X on some of his opinions". For over telephone (telephone taps), I just don't care. Never did, never will.

 

For Habeas Corpus (and I think you mean, among others, Guantanamo Bay) I fully agree with you. To quote Winston Churchill "You can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners."

 

 

 

I think an anarchy is worse and people are incompetent, so we actually need an government. How the US government operate, I can't tell exactly. However, as I said before, democracy is not the perfect situation. We want that everything which has to be decided, is actually the opinion of many people. But because people can't see the difference between what's good for themselves and what is good for the country, we need the government to balance that. But since everybody votes for "me me me", we get an !@#$ at bureaucracy. Because what is good for me, is not good for you, so we need an bureaucrat to find the best solution for us. We complain if it takes 4 years, but we also complain if it takes 2 days, because you can't have observed every useless detail in 2 days.

 

 

I wish I could say the same. But not only the people in my country are stupid, also people in other countries are stupid, and sometimes they need our help

What I referring to was that you can't compare protests from a tyranny regime vs. protests from a Republic. Believe or not, we haven't lost all of our civil liberties

 

You said most of the protesters were arrested because of violence, while in fact the majority were arrested because of death threats.

 

Representative Democracy only ignores the minority if the minority only wants what is not for the entire country. In the case of where we are at now in our history, the majority are the ones who want what is not good for the country. I don't want the government providing 100% of the food, water and shelter for 100% of our people. I want the government to define a floor and make sure that a high majority of our people have enough opportunities to rise above that floor and achieve the American Dream. The majority's suppression of the minority can be ugly, and democracy may just perpetuate that. Other places with different histories may well work better on theocratic or tribal principles. Democracy can work pretty well in post-Enlightenment countries that are ethnically homogeneous and reasonably egalitarian. In other kinds of places, going through the motions of democracy isn't likely to change the way real power is distributed. I'm sure you're right to suspect that democracy isn't The Answer.Maybe it's a mistake to look for one best form of government for all times and places. Especially in places with long histories of ethnic antagonisms. But I can't see what else is good...Although, Democracy tends to make people more enlightened. Democracy is impossible without Enlightenment values, but I think it is very difficult to spread these values without democracy. And it takes work not just to create a government of, by and for the people, but it takes continuous work to maintain it. We can't assume that a government will last forever, because no government ever has.