THE DYNAMIC PART OF DEMOCRACY COMES FROM EMPOWERING THE MINORITY.
Hi Focs,
BODVAR
> Democracy is an Intellectual pattern we all agree on
I'm not sure about that (despite Pirsig). Historically, features of
democracy like the England's Magna Carta and Iceland's parliament
appeared well before either of these countries were exposed to the
Intellectual patterns derived from Greek (Socratic) philosophy - that
only penetrated the West during the Renaissance.
I consider that the institutions of democracy are SOCIAL patterns.
However, I agree with everyone else in this thread that democracy has
been very successuful in producing societies that are both stable and
adaptable to change - a good mix of dynamism and static latching. IMO
this is because democracy gives a degree of acceptance to minority
views, and even reinforces them in institutions like a parliamentary
opposition (which may even include a state-funded shadow cabinet). We
value opposing opinions and the dialogue between them so much that this
is the basis of our legal system. Even though democracy largely accepts
the majority view, we value minority opinions not because we think that
they are right, but we have to consider the possibility that the
majority might be wrong.
The whole of nature works like this. The genetic code is "degenerate"
(i.e. several alternative 3-base codons can all code for the same amino
acid). Mutations are allowed and tolerated as much as possible - even
encouraged to perpetuate though "recessive" genes. Allowed, yes, but
always kept in check. IMO the reason this works (for nature and society)
is as follows:
When you are driving along the main road and suddenly find it
bocked,
it's nice to know that there is a side road to go back to.
Jonathan
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:27 BST