XPost: calgary.general, can.politics, edm.general 
 XPost: hfx.general, tor.general, van.general 
 XPost: wpg.general 
 From: penny@pen.rhys 
  
 On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 00:50:07 GMT, LC@dinkerson.com (Ladies Choice) 
 wrote: 
  
 >In article , penny@pen.rhys 
 says... 
 >> 
 >> When you look at it on a continuum of political systems 
 >>from democracy to totalitarianism one sees that it's undoubtedly the 
 >>freest possible system there is. 
 > 
 >Totalitarianism is not necessarily in opposition to democracy.  Nazi Germany 
 >was effectively a democratic totalitarian state (though democracy was 
 somewhat 
 >subverted in order to speed things along).  Democracy is in opposition to 
 >monarchist and dictatorial regimes.  It's unlikely a population operating 
 under 
 >democracy would elect people that would impliment a totalitarian regime, but 
 it 
 >happens. 
  
  
 Totalitarianism is dictatorial and authoritarian and to me seems a 
 more appropriate choice than monarchist.    One could get a benevolent 
 monarchist whoses regime was democratic in nature. 
  
 There was nothing democratic about Nazi Germany. 
  
 >> 
 >>Unfortunately political systems are dynamic and ever changing so 
 >>democracy, in its purest form starts going downhill from the instant 
 >>of its inauguration. 
 > 
 >Well usually the people implimenting democracy are revolutionaries, they 
 have 
 >to believe they are fighting for something much better than it is, in order 
 to 
 >have the determination to win.  That's why democracy has ended up with such 
 an 
 >inflated reputation. 
  
  
 A reputatioon it deserves in my book.  As Churchill said: 
  
 " Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this 
 world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or 
 all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of 
 Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time 
 to time." 
  
  
 >>With the crowning of Harper we shall hear the death knell of any 
 >>semblance of democracy that was left in our system. 
 >> 
 > 
 >That's so unlikely that it is blatant fearmongering. 
  
  
 There is no fearmongering about it. Harper is following Bush in using 
 the politics of deception along with the Bush technique of repetition. 
  
 It worked for Bush who created and spread a culture of lies in the US 
 the like of which has never been seen before.  Bush is now at the 
 point where he is telling lies about previous lies and lies about 
 those lies. And one day his house of cards will fall on his head. But 
 how long will it take and what harm his policies of divisiveness and 
 destructiveness have brought to our world. 
  
 For over a year Harper's  major attack has concentrated on the 
 corruption of Martin and the liberals when nothing is further from the 
 truth.    His smearing of Martin and his constant repetition of 
 those smears has convinced the public that Martin is corrupt when 
 nothing is further from the truth when you look at Martin's record. 
  
 Harper will have a hard time during his first four years because the 
 three other parties in power are to the left of him.  But he will 
 continue his smears and his repetition of smears  to influence the 
 public and get in with a majority the next time.  When that happens we 
 can say goodbye democracy and hello social conservatism, a failing 
 economy and the politics of neo-fascism. 
  
 Fearmongering comes from ignorance and not from rational thinking 
 skills applied to a whole load of knowledge that leads from analysis 
 and criticism to synthesis. 
  
 Penny 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)