Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
property without consent or fair compensation.

Work <qqq.rrr@ttt.sss.zzz> wrote:
> Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
> property without consent or fair compensation.

You assume too much about what MAY constitute a democracy.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
> Democracy means that if this man, you, and I will be trapped on an
> island, we having a majority of votes will decide that you have to
> sleep with us. That's the Democracy. And with 2/3 votes we can even
> put that in the constitution.
> source: speech during a meeting in the R. Barbosa High School

--
A. Filip
| The road to ruin is always in good repair, and the travelers pay
| the expense of it. (Josh Billings)

On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 9:55:24 PM UTC-5, Work wrote:
> Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
> property without consent or fair compensation.

1. Eminent Domain overrule consent.
2. Fair compensation is a matter which side's legal team is more persuaive.

On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 10:44:02 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> Work <qqq...@ttt.sss.zzz> wrote:
> > Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
> > property without consent or fair compensation.
> You assume too much about what MAY constitute a democracy.
>
> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
> > Democracy means that if this man, you, and I will be trapped on an
> > island, we having a majority of votes will decide that you have to
> > sleep with us. That's the Democracy. And with 2/3 votes we can even
> > put that in the constitution.
> > source: speech during a meeting in the R. Barbosa High School

Democracy always have no meanings rationally speaking: procedurally
and outcome based (Or substantial and transactional).
>
> --
> A. Filip
> | The road to ruin is always in good repair, and the travelers pay
> | the expense of it. (Josh Billings)

ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 10:44:02 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
>> Work <qqq...@ttt.sss.zzz> wrote:
>> > Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
>> > property without consent or fair compensation.
>> You assume too much about what MAY constitute a democracy.
>>
>> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
>> > Democracy means that if this man, you, and I will be trapped on an
>> > island, we having a majority of votes will decide that you have to
>> > sleep with us. That's the Democracy. And with 2/3 votes we can even
>> > put that in the constitution.
>> > source: speech during a meeting in the R. Barbosa High School
>
> Democracy always have no meanings rationally speaking: procedurally
> and outcome based (Or substantial and transactional).

Do you include Swiss _direct_ democracy?
I would suggests "usually+" instead of "always".

<advocatus-diaboli> BTW AFAIK USA have not respected _legal_ property
of slave owners and paid no "fair compensation". Is it a mark of
undemocratic country? </advocatus-diaboli>

There are rules, exception and exceptions to exceptions.

--
A. Filip
| There's nothing to writing. All you do is sit at a typewriter and
| open a vein. (Red Smith)

On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 11:34:46 AM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 10:44:02 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> >> Work <qqq...@ttt.sss.zzz> wrote:
> >> > Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
> >> > property without consent or fair compensation.
> >> You assume too much about what MAY constitute a democracy.
> >>
> >> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
> >> > Democracy means that if this man, you, and I will be trapped on an
> >> > island, we having a majority of votes will decide that you have to
> >> > sleep with us. That's the Democracy. And with 2/3 votes we can even
> >> > put that in the constitution.
> >> > source: speech during a meeting in the R. Barbosa High School
> >
> > Democracy always have no meanings rationally speaking: procedurally
> > and outcome based (Or substantial and transactional).
> Do you include Swiss _direct_ democracy?
> I would suggests "usually+" instead of "always".

It ALWAYS have two meanings rationally speaking.
Humans are ALWAYS free to choose one of the two meanings whenever expedient..
Direct democracy, to the extent that it could not meet the people's needs and desires,
is not democratic transactionally speaking.

BTW, Swiss is indeed the First nation to have univeral MALE suffrage because of universal
conscription. Basically "One gun, One vote." But it is also one of the last nation to have
unversal suffrage among Western nations because women were not conscripted.

China would be a lot more democratic, procedurally/substantially speaking, if it sees
fighting the US plus other Western nations as inevitable. Needless to say, such an
eventuality is disastrous to the whole world.

>
> <advocatus-diaboli> BTW AFAIK USA have not respected _legal_ property
> of slave owners and paid no "fair compensation". Is it a mark of
> undemocratic country? </advocatus-diaboli>
>
> There are rules, exception and exceptions to exceptions.
>
> --
> A. Filip
> | There's nothing to writing. All you do is sit at a typewriter and
> | open a vein. (Red Smith)

On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 12:08:12 PM UTC-5, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 11:34:46 AM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> > > On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 10:44:02 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> > >> Work <qqq...@ttt.sss.zzz> wrote:
> > >> > Under democracy, private property is respected. Do not take private
> > >> > property without consent or fair compensation.
> > >> You assume too much about what MAY constitute a democracy.
> > >>
> > >> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
> > >> > Democracy means that if this man, you, and I will be trapped on an
> > >> > island, we having a majority of votes will decide that you have to
> > >> > sleep with us. That's the Democracy. And with 2/3 votes we can even
> > >> > put that in the constitution.
> > >> > source: speech during a meeting in the R. Barbosa High School
> > >
> > > Democracy always have no meanings rationally speaking: procedurally
> > > and outcome based (Or substantial and transactional).
> > Do you include Swiss _direct_ democracy?
> > I would suggests "usually+" instead of "always".
> It ALWAYS have two meanings rationally speaking.
> Humans are ALWAYS free to choose one of the two meanings whenever expedient.
> Direct democracy, to the extent that it could not meet the people's needs and desires,
> is not democratic transactionally speaking.

More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power is the ultimate
soft power. People selectively remember and forget part of their past to become ONE
PEOPLE.

To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural democracy" would more
likely than not, produce the tyranny of the majority, not real democracy.

>
> BTW, Swiss is indeed the First nation to have univeral MALE suffrage because of universal
> conscription. Basically "One gun, One vote." But it is also one of the last nation to have
> unversal suffrage among Western nations because women were not conscripted.
>
> China would be a lot more democratic, procedurally/substantially speaking, if it sees
> fighting the US plus other Western nations as inevitable. Needless to say, such an
> eventuality is disastrous to the whole world.
> >
> > <advocatus-diaboli> BTW AFAIK USA have not respected _legal_ property
> > of slave owners and paid no "fair compensation". Is it a mark of
> > undemocratic country? </advocatus-diaboli>
> >
> > There are rules, exception and exceptions to exceptions.
> >
> > --
> > A. Filip
> > | There's nothing to writing. All you do is sit at a typewriter and

> > | open a vein. (Red Smith)

ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[…]
> More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
>
> To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> majority, not real democracy.

Is India more "one people" than China?

--
A. Filip
| An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest.
| (Benjamin Franklin)

On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 5:40:34 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 wrote:
> >[…]
> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >
> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> > majority, not real democracy.
> Is India more "one people" than China?

I can say mainland China is more one people than the US. Don't know
India enough.

>
> --
> A. Filip
> | An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest.
> | (Benjamin Franklin)

On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >[…]
> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >
> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> > majority, not real democracy.
> Is India more "one people" than China?

Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-5, bmoore wrote:
> On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> > >[…]
> > > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> > > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> > > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> > >
> > > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> > > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> > > majority, not real democracy.
> > Is India more "one people" than China?

> Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.

Reality is lousy. This "one people" process is definitely working in the ROC.
Including Lai, 4 out 5 ROC presidents after Jiang Jr. are either anti or not enthusiatice about the ROC.
Lee Teng-hui, who succede Jiang Jr., was once a communist. Lai is likely to be the last anti or not-
enthusiatic about ROC president.

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 10:01:44 AM UTC-8, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-5, bmoore wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> > > ltlee1 wrote:
> > > >[…]
> > > > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> > > > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> > > > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> > > >
> > > > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> > > > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> > > > majority, not real democracy.
> > > Is India more "one people" than China?
>
> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> Reality is lousy.

Sorry your reality is lousy.

> This "one people" process is definitely working in the ROC.

The PRC is not "one people" even without Taiwan. No large country is "one people".

> Including Lai, 4 out 5 ROC presidents after Jiang Jr. are either anti or not enthusiatice about the ROC.
> Lee Teng-hui, who succede Jiang Jr., was once a communist. Lai is likely to be the last anti or not-
> enthusiatic about ROC president.

bmoore <bmoore@nyx.net> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >[…]
>> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
>> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
>> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
>> >
>> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
>> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
>> > majority, not real democracy.
>>
>> Is India more "one people" than China?
>
> Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.

IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
it helps a lot.

--
A. Filip
| I can't understand why a person will take a year or two to write a
| novel when he can easily buy one for a few dollars. (Fred Allen)

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >[…]
> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >> >
> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> >> > majority, not real democracy.
> >>
> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
> >
> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
> it helps a lot.

What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we both know how they handle it.

"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 3:55:28 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> ltlee1 wrote:
> >> >[…]
> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >> >
> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> >> > majority, not real democracy.
> >>
> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
> >
> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
> it helps a lot.

Was pre-Civil War US a democracy or a tyranny of the majority?
I am sure different people will answer the question differently.
>
> --
> A. Filip
> | I can't understand why a person will take a year or two to write a
> | novel when he can easily buy one for a few dollars. (Fred Allen)

bmoore <bmoore@nyx.net> wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> >> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >[…]
>> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
>> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
>> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
>> >> >
>> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
>> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
>> >> > majority, not real democracy.
>> >>
>> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
>> >
>> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
>> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
>> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
>> it helps a lot.
>
> What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we
> both know how they handle it.
>
> "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."

"One People" should mean _wanting_ to be one people.
It may mean American Civil War (Secession War).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

In "One PRC China" v "One ROC China" context:
Is ROC ready to change its constitution to be democratic and independent?

--
A. Filip
| If it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is
| a Fact, proof is necessary. (Samuel Clemens)

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 1:18:00 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> >> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >[…]
> >> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> >> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> >> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> >> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> >> >> > majority, not real democracy.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
> >> >
> >> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> >> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> >> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
> >> it helps a lot.
> >
> > What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we
> > both know how they handle it.
> >
> > "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
> "One People" should mean _wanting_ to be one people.

That still begs the question of what "one people" means.

> It may mean American Civil War (Secession War).
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War
>
> In "One PRC China" v "One ROC China" context:
> Is ROC ready to change its constitution to be democratic and independent?
>
> --
> A. Filip
> | If it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is
> | a Fact, proof is necessary. (Samuel Clemens)

bmoore <bmoore@nyx.net> wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 1:18:00 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> >> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>> >> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
>> >> >> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >[…]
>> >> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
>> >> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
>> >> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
>> >> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
>> >> >> > majority, not real democracy.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
>> >> >
>> >> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
>> >> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
>> >> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
>> >> it helps a lot.
>> >
>> > What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we
>> > both know how they handle it.
>> >
>> > "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
>> "One People" should mean _wanting_ to be one people.
>> […]
>
> That still begs the question of what "one people" means.

When? Where?
The meaning is (politically) "very flexible".

--
| While it may be true that a watched pot never boils, the one you
| don't keep an eye on can make an awful mess of your stove.
| (Edward Stevenson)

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 4:18:00 PM UTC-5, A. Filip wrote:
> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> >> ltlee1 wrote:
> >> >> >[…]
> >> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> >> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> >> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> >> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> >> >> > majority, not real democracy.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
> >> >
> >> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> >> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> >> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
> >> it helps a lot.
> >
> > What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we
> > both know how they handle it.
> >
> > "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
> "One People" should mean _wanting_ to be one people.
> It may mean American Civil War (Secession War).
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War
>
> In "One PRC China" v "One ROC China" context:
> Is ROC ready to change its constitution to be democratic and independent?

The PROC and the ROC ARE still the oppoiste sides of the yet to be concluded
Chinese Civil War.

ROC was considered democratic and free since the PRC had taken over China
since 1949 by the US. The US navy had successfullyblocked the PRC from taking
over Taiwan. The US also persuaded the world to accept the ROC as the sole
legitimate government of all China. And the ROC was allowed to hold the permanent
UNSC seat until Nixon visited China. The UN General Assembly then recognized the
PROC as the sole legitimate government of all of China. The US as well as other
powers then established diplomatic relationship with the the PROC based on the
ONE CHINA principle. That is, there is ONE CHINA, according to both PROC and
ROC consititutions.

The PROC would not tolerate Two China and/or One China-One Taiwan. Any such
attempt would simply reignite the civil war.
> --
> A. Filip
> | If it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is
> | a Fact, proof is necessary. (Samuel Clemens)

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 2:17:49 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 1:18:00 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:55:28 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> >> bmoore <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >> >> > On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 2:40:34 PM UTC-8, A. Filip wrote:
> >> >> >> ltlee1 <ltl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >[…]
> >> >> >> > More import, democracy begins with ONE PEOPLE. Civilizational power
> >> >> >> > is the ultimate soft power. People selectively remember and forget
> >> >> >> > part of their past to become ONE PEOPLE.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > To the extent that a country is not of ONE PEOPLE, "procedural
> >> >> >> > democracy" would more likely than not, produce the tyranny of the
> >> >> >> > majority, not real democracy.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Is India more "one people" than China?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Selectively forgetting parts of the past means living a lie. This "one
> >> >> > people" concept, whatever it means, sounds lousy.
> >> >> IMHO it is not strictly necessary/required for a working democracy but
> >> >> it helps a lot.
> >> >
> >> > What does "one people" even mean? There is dissent in China but we
> >> > both know how they handle it.
> >> >
> >> > "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
> >> "One People" should mean _wanting_ to be one people.
> >> […]
> >
> > That still begs the question of what "one people" means.
> When? Where?
> The meaning is (politically) "very flexible".

Or just very united in purpose. Not necessarily good.