This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.

Reply to comment

Iron Mike

9 August 2008 - 12:01pm

Quote:

In this paradigm when the poor fail to participate it is they who are blamed for not acting in their own interests (the left is as guilty of this as the right). Democracy amounts to government of, by and for the people. If any of these prepositions do not apply then it is the model of democracy itself which is awry - not the masses whom it is meant to serve.

Interesting. Because the poor fail to participate in a democracy and act in their own interest, it is the failure of the democratic model? There is no personal responsibility (and accountability) on the individual in this social contract?

Of course, once you accept the poor are incapable of acting in their own interest, then it is an easy step to empowering a benevolent state to step in and act on their behalf in loco parentis. But as we've seen throughout history, rarely does the state remain benevolent. The state is no longer serving the masses; the masses become servant of the state.