Imagine you are in a ship and cath sight of the shore. By chance, it's in the direction of a cloud wich looks like a dragon. On that exactly moment, the ship crash against an iceberg and sinks into few minutes. So the tripulation has no time to send a mayday.
In this situation, only you and other five people get to get away in the unique safeboat existing.
But, when you have to choise the direction to go, nobody agree with the idea of going to the direction of the strange cloud (wher you asure to see the shore). Five against one - it should be a cowardliness, not to be the fact of you are taking a pistol. And now? Do you draw the gun and force your colegues to row to where you want or do you acept the decision of maiority of going to the other way (to the deep blue sea)?
2006-09-02 16:24:47 · 7 answers · asked by Leão do Cerrado 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well, I suppose I would just sit tight, because if we just hit an iceberg, there probably isn't any land around....
2006-09-02 16:36:41 · answer #1 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you know that the direction towards cloud will save you, of course you will go towards the clouds.
The other people are not crazy. If you explain it to them rationally, the need to draw a gun should not materialize...
I think this is a wrong way to equate democracy.
There is no place for democracy in a military.
That does not make either military or democracy as bad.
One has to view things in context. Things are not strictly black & white...
In the end Democracy is always better than tyrrany...
It is better to live in the misery of democracy tha the so called prosperity of tyranny...
If you explain things peoperly, you will not need a gun to solve the problem...
2006-09-02 16:39:27 · answer #2 · answered by nirjhar_jain 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on how much respect the dictator has for individual rights, compared to the majority in the democracy.
Both are situations where rules are determined using a might-makes-right system. The only difference is whether one individual or the group is making the decision. And a tyrant is just a dictator that people don't like.
2006-09-02 16:28:43 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that's more of a question of survival if anything. If it is a choice between me respecting others rights to make a wrong decision and my life, I chose my life and force them to row in my direction and in turn save there lives as well. I mean if five people told you to jump off a building and that you would live, would you listen?
2006-09-02 16:36:43 · answer #4 · answered by hungryhillkid 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i send the one that cant spell over the side to tow the boat in and then calmly remind the other 4 that survival is easier on LAND...
and shooting a gun on an inflatable life raft....
well I assume that you can add 2 and 2...
2006-09-02 16:32:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm...
That's an interesting way to put it. Considering that, I would probably do the former. The latter could lead to land, but the odds are against you.
2006-09-02 16:35:18 · answer #6 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question asks about forms of government, but your description has nothing to do with government. Don't try and oversimplify, it just confuses things and leads to poor arguments.
2006-09-02 16:31:45 · answer #7 · answered by Sordenhiemer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋