Moderator: Community Team
jonesthecurl wrote:Burned the Whitehouse.
mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
When did that happen?
Symmetry wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
When did that happen?
17th Century?
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
When did that happen?
17th Century?
So we're talking about Oliver Cromwell? I guess he was okay.
saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
When did that happen?
17th Century?
So we're talking about Oliver Cromwell? I guess he was okay.
Dukasaur wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Symmetry wrote:saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:What did England do several centuries ago that you really admire?
England devised the only stable democracy in history. The only democracy that didn't almost immediately begin violating its own principles and spiralling downward into dictatorship.
When did that happen?
17th Century?
So we're talking about Oliver Cromwell? I guess he was okay.
No, we're talking about everything since Cromwell.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
saxitoxin wrote:If that's a stable democracy, I'd hate to live in an unstable one.
British National Archives wrote:A survey conducted in 1780 revealed that the electorate in England and Wales consisted of just 214,000 people - less than 3% of the total population of approximately 8 million. In Scotland the electorate was even smaller: in 1831 a mere 4,500 men, out of a population of more than 2.6 million people, were entitled to vote in parliamentary elections.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/path ... g_vote.htm
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Dukasaur wrote:saxitoxin wrote:If that's a stable democracy, I'd hate to live in an unstable one.
Since you live in a police state that masquerades as a democracy, I suppose your wish has been granted.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
saxitoxin wrote:So the world's only stable democracy in history started with the supreme ruler ordering the mass execution of members of the legislature, then continued with the armed overthrow of said supreme ruler 20 years later in violation of the constitution, then his replacement with the CEO of the 17th century version of Blackwater (William of Orange), then 50 years of Iraq-style insurrections in Scotland (albeit comparatively more violent), then a shorter period of ethnic cleansing in aformentioned Scotland, all the while 97% of the population wasn't allowed to vote?
If that's a stable democracy, I'd hate to live in an unstable one.
Symmetry wrote:saxitoxin wrote:So the world's only stable democracy in history started with the supreme ruler ordering the mass execution of members of the legislature, then continued with the armed overthrow of said supreme ruler 20 years later in violation of the constitution, then his replacement with the CEO of the 17th century version of Blackwater (William of Orange), then 50 years of Iraq-style insurrections in Scotland (albeit comparatively more violent), then a shorter period of ethnic cleansing in aformentioned Scotland, all the while 97% of the population wasn't allowed to vote?
If that's a stable democracy, I'd hate to live in an unstable one.
[Response lacking any actual counter-argument]
saxitoxin wrote:Dukasaur wrote:saxitoxin wrote:If that's a stable democracy, I'd hate to live in an unstable one.
Since you live in a police state that masquerades as a democracy, I suppose your wish has been granted.
What's it mean when one lives in a client state of said police state?
Dukasaur wrote:The prime minister of Canada, like the prime minister of Britain, is able to travel around with just a handful of bodyguards.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
riskllama wrote:hey saxi, i think sym just hit on you...
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Users browsing this forum: No registered users