|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 536 responses total. |
mcnally
|
|
response 487 of 536:
| 
Dec 19 18:01 UTC 2003 |
re #484: patently false, as I can think of several obvious
counter-examples to your claim. Of course it becomes a bit
harder if you choose to stretch your definition of democracy
beyond reason. If the Pope is elected by the College of
Cardinals, does that make the Vatican a democracy?
|
jp2
|
|
response 488 of 536:
|
Dec 19 18:27 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
tod
|
|
response 489 of 536:
|
Dec 19 23:45 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
twenex
|
|
response 490 of 536:
|
Dec 20 01:24 UTC 2003 |
Re: #484: If true, that's probably got to do with the fact that their
isn't a single country in the world that has a Caucasian majority and
where people living anywhere above the breadlne aren't filthy rich
compared to the average in the rest of the world - i.e. the
middle=classes effectively represent the largest or moot powerful
class.
|
tod
|
|
response 491 of 536:
|
Dec 20 01:29 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
twenex
|
|
response 492 of 536:
|
Dec 20 01:46 UTC 2003 |
Whether it be or no, I don't think Isrealis are classed as Caucasians,
sicne they are related to the Egyptians the Berbers of North Africa,
and the Arabs. Caucasians the world over have a nasty habit ;-) of
speaking Indo-European languages natively.
|
klg
|
|
response 493 of 536:
|
Dec 20 02:26 UTC 2003 |
News flash:
In a surprise move today, Colonel Qaddafi of Libya, to show his
growing hatred for the U.S. and his desire to make us less safe,
announced he is dismantling his nuclear weapons program and allowing
the entry of international inspectors. Lefties are now quaking in
their beds since this is a clear reaction to the U.S. quagmires in
Afghanistan and Iraq. How-weird Dean (Go, How-vierd) in close
consultation with his buddy Herr richard, caught with their shorts
down, have, to our knowledge not yet issued a statement critical of
the Bush administration's handling of this crisis. But one is
expected shortly.
|
keesan
|
|
response 494 of 536:
|
Dec 20 02:47 UTC 2003 |
Lots of people in this country who are not 'Caucasian' speak English.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 495 of 536:
|
Dec 20 05:55 UTC 2003 |
Re #486: The ones who wrote the position paper about preventing the growth
of regional superpowers.
|
twenex
|
|
response 496 of 536:
|
Dec 20 12:32 UTC 2003 |
Yes, but a hefty proportion of those who speak Indo-European languages
in its home area are Caucasian, excluding immigrants from countries
where non-Indo-European languages are spoken, and thos in the Indian
sub-continent, and Iran. There are also still many many rural places
in Africa where, although the whites speak Indo-European languages and
many middle class native Africans do, the rural indigenous
populatrions do not speak it at all, let alone natively.
This is possibly also true of some isolated places in Australia.
|
scott
|
|
response 497 of 536:
|
Dec 20 14:14 UTC 2003 |
Re 493: Excellent news. I hope that Pres. Bush won't kick out the inspectors
the way he did in Iraq...
|
gelinas
|
|
response 498 of 536:
|
Dec 20 14:42 UTC 2003 |
(There are many dark-skinned Caucasians in India. Iran, too, I think.)
|
twenex
|
|
response 499 of 536:
|
Dec 20 14:58 UTC 2003 |
My understanding is that "Caucasian" does not include dark-skinned
Indo-Europeans. If it does, then you can delete "and those...Iran" in
my response above.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 500 of 536:
|
Dec 20 15:05 UTC 2003 |
And my understanding is that it does, on theory that the migrants from the
Caucusus Mountains adapted to the more-intense rays of the sun in other
climes.
|
keesan
|
|
response 501 of 536:
|
Dec 20 15:08 UTC 2003 |
Or interbred with the native people that they conquered, such as Dravidians.
|
willcome
|
|
response 502 of 536:
|
Dec 20 22:40 UTC 2003 |
Re. 487: The Vatican isn't nation-state in the traditional sense. You've
yet to provide a single example of an undemocratic nation-state with a
Caucasian majority.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 503 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:24 UTC 2003 |
Belarus.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 504 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:25 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 505 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:26 UTC 2003 |
Or, if you prefer, Monaco.
|
twenex
|
|
response 506 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:38 UTC 2003 |
Andorra (upto the late nineties). Luxembourg/Liechtenstein (one of the
two, can't remember which). Most of South America until the 90s.
Britain, if you believe democracy can't exist independently of
republicanism (in the wide sense, not the American political sense).
|
gelinas
|
|
response 507 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:46 UTC 2003 |
(Liechtenstein is a hereditary constitutional monarchy on a democratic and
parliamentary basis. Luxembourg is a constitutional monarchy.)
|
twenex
|
|
response 508 of 536:
|
Dec 20 23:51 UTC 2003 |
/scratches chin.
I'm sure I'd heard that one of the two was about to become a mediaeval
style mnonarchy again, on the basis that if it wasn't, the monarch
would leave and go live in Austria. Mustn't have happened.
|
willcome
|
|
response 509 of 536:
|
Dec 21 01:19 UTC 2003 |
Re. 503 & 505: Both of those states are democratic by any measure.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 510 of 536:
|
Dec 21 02:41 UTC 2003 |
Perhaps I'm confusing Belarus with another ex-Soviet Republic. I was
under the impression they had a Communist-remnant government that had
cancelled scheduled elections when they seemed inconvenient.
Is the People's Republic of China a democracy according to your rules?
Not that it fits your other criterion, but I just want to know whether
it's worth playing your definition-of-democracy game.
|
willcome
|
|
response 511 of 536:
|
Dec 21 02:51 UTC 2003 |
Yes, Rand, you're probably confusing it with South Africa or another primitive
state, like China, which, of course, is not a democracy.
|
