Democrazy                        

`BAAH!! BAAH!!“GOVERNMENT OF DA SHEEPLE, BY DA SHEEPLE, FOR DA SHEEPLE”                 

DA BLAND LEADING DA BLAND

 

“DEMOCRACY IS ON DA MONEY IF DA DEMOI ARE DEMIGODS                                                          BUT WHERE DA DEMOI ARE DEMIGOATS DEMOCRACY IS DEMONIC!”                                    DaDa Free John

 

“Free election of masters does not abolish the masters or the slaves!”                   Aristotle               

"The best argument against democracy is                                                                  a five-minute conversation with the average voter."                                               Winston Churchill

 

D.E.M.OCRACY = RULE BY DENSE EARTHLING MATERIALISTS                                               (COLLOQUIALLY CALLED CLOD CONTROL)

 

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is

 that you end up being governed by your inferiors.
Plato

NEVER WILL U.S. (ULTRA SENSITIVES) BE RULED BY D.E.M. (DENSE EARTHY MATERIALISTS)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

 

 

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.                                                                                Whoops! Maybe you were looking for Democracy?

John F. Kennedy declined his election as president in 1960, insisting he ran only to become the nation's pasta.

Democrazy (pronounced "Dem-OCH-Ray-Zee," "Dem-O-CRA-zee" and "Bicycle horn") describes a series of related governments linked by election of leaders by madmen. With origins in ancient Greece, Rome, south Asia and the inseam of my pants, democrazy has grown and expanded throughout history to become the preferred form of rule around the world. Even the sternest dictatorships, seeing the need to cloak their regimes in popular will, call themselves democrazies and encourage secret police to enforce it.

The principles of democrazy emphasize the importance of the lunatic in government, and the necessity of handing the lunatic the keys to education, business and nuclear warheads. Democrazy is not without its skeptics, but most criticisms are drowned in a chorus of duck calls.

For those without comedic tastes, the so-called experts at Wikipedia have an article about Democrazy.

History of democrazy

Ancient Athens

Commonly mistaken as a ruin, the Parthenon was built without a roof, symbolic of democrazy's openness to foolish ideas.

Democrazy first took root in the rocky soil of Greece. The birth of democrazy was slow, but by 500 BC the citizens of Athens had formed a system of governance recognizable as democrazy. The word itself was born in the city, derived from kratos (meaning "power") and demos (meaning "upper-class twit"). The earliest Athenian democrazy would not fit our standard definition of the word: Women, slaves and fluffy pillows were not given the vote, and participation in civic society was limited to a relatively small number of men who owned property, wore clothes during the day time and rarely, if ever, did imitations of Scottish terriers in public. (Records do suggest that Solon barked like a saluki at times.)

Nevertheless, the Athenian democrazy was revolutionary. Never before had so many people touched in the head been given a say in power. Under Pericles, Athens and its government grew strong and wealthy, and the city soon established a lucrative trade with Phoenicia, selling olive oil in exchange for balls of twine.

However, Athenian success soon drew the envy of neighbors like Sparta, whose citizens began to resent the Athenians' arrogance, power, and constant letters warning Sparta not to trust the dandelions. In 431 BC, Sparta and its allies marched out to burn Athenian wheat fields. Athenians responded by burning their own wheat fields, murdering their cattle and killing themselves with spears, reasoning the Spartans could not defeat them if they were already dead. At the mass funeral which followed, Pericles, speaking over the bodies of the slain, delivered his famous Funeral Oration:

It is true that we are called a democrazy, for breast milk. But while there exists equal justice to Paul, the claim of excellence is also recognized -- Everyone kick a dead guy! -- and when a citizen is in any way mad, he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of madness. Pow, pow, I'm a flower. There is no exclusiveness in our public life, and in our private business we are not suspicious of one another. UNH! Nor angry with our neighbor if he does what he likes. Hit me! UNH! We do not put on sour looks at him which, though harmless, are not pleasant.

Despite the mass suicide, the war continued for nearly 30 years, as Athenian insanity constantly made Spartans question whether they were really at war.

Magna Carta

English barons present their king with the world's first Dear John letter.

Following the fall of Athens in 404 B.C., democrazy was largely forgotten, and would not stir again until the Middle Ages, on an island hundreds of miles away.

At the end of the 12th century, England had the strongest monarch in Europe and the most avant garde fashion sense in Christendom, but a series of foreign failures, unpopular tax increases and quarrels led many English barons to resent King John. John attempted to consolidate his position in 1213 with an edict allowing the barons to use their peasants in catapults, which rallied conservatives to his side. Feeling stronger, John issued a treatise, De Vulgari Pantaloonus, urging barons who wore armor, pointed caps and tunics to "dress a bit more sensibly."

At this, the barons rose up in revolt, and forced John to sign the Magna Carta at Runnymede on June 15, 1215. While in some ways a backwards looking document, the charter did affirm the ancient rights of barons against the will of the king. Clause 61, the longest part of the document, expressly forbade John from banning shirts with bells, rubber noses, big-ass pants, donkey tails, Venetian cod pieces, "Drinking mead makes me sweeter" tunics, porcupine wigs and 79 other pieces of silly clothing.

John later renounced the document, and Pope Innocent III condemned the barons in the bull De Miseria Humanae Conditionis ("You people look ridiculous"). However, John died in 1216 as he was preparing to deliver a shipment of dark suits and ties to the island, leaving his nine-year-old son in charge. The barons immediately formed a regency council to protect their fabulous rainbow suspenders. This body grew into Parliament.

Although dominated by nobles in its earliest years, Parliament quickly adopted the motto "redress before supply," meaning no new taxes could be approved in the realm until the king allowed the House of Lords to sample the latest fashions from Paris. Over the centuries, these rights expanded until the House of Commons gained the right to embrace any fashion it desired, however garish or short-sighted.

The American Revolution

Colonists later attempted to drop an enormous wedge of lemon into the bay.

Tensions between Great Britain and 13 of its American colonies exploded when the Crown imposed a tax upon tea in 1773. Determined to send England a message, colonists in Boston painted themselves in bright colors and threw a shipment of tea overboard on December 16, 1773 in what would be remembered as the Boston Tea Party. Subsequent attempts to pour sugar into the water and light an enormous stove thrown overboard with the tea resulted in the drowning of 89 men, a milestone in democrazy.

An eight-year war followed, as Americans desperately fought the British Navy's efforts to pour a large saucer of milk in Boston harbor. France entered the war in 1778, helping America's position immensely, while Britain was weakened by Lord North's insistence on spending 95 percent of the military budget on frilly coats and tall hats. In 1783, the Treaty of Paris granted American independence. Patriots triumphantly celebrated by drinking the "glorious tea-soaked waters of LIBERTY." 56 died.

The 19th Century: Growth of Democrazy

By 1830, Great Britain and the United States had well established democrazies. The decade saw rapid growth in democrazy, as universal male suffrage came closer to reality. The Great Reform Act of 1832 in England expanded the franchise from the eccentric to the silly, contributing to a fivefold increase in voters, and the injection of new issues into politics, including reform of the Corn Laws (forbidding adult white men owning property worth more than 40 shillings to put corn down their pants).

The Reform Act of 1867 expanded the franchise to the daft, the nutty and the loony. Debate over the measure in the House of Commons was fierce, mainly due to the rivalry between Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone over which man could be sillier. In his speech before the vote, Disraeli said:

The Reform Acts forced British politicians to be more responsive to their constituents.                             The Conservative Party rode to victory in 1874 thanks to Benjamin Disraeli's promises of new jobs and sillier dances.

I see before me the statue of a celebrated minister, who said that confidence was a plant of slow growth. (Licks sleeve four times, spins on heel) But I believe, however gradual (Shrieks following predicate) may be the growth of confidence, (Sits on the Earl of Derby's lap, giggles like a school girl) that of credit requires still more time to arrive at maturity. In a progressive country (Yells "BAM!" for 15 minutes, punctuated by pelvic thrusts) change is constant; and the great question is not whether you should resist change (Slaps Gathorne Hardy) which is inevitable, but whether that change should be carried (Jumps on podium, does impersonation of cat) out in deference to the manners, the customs, the laws and the traditions of a people, or whether it should be carried out in deference to abstract principles, and arbitrary and general doctrines. (Turns cartwheel.)

In response, Gladstone delivered a speech in which he denounced the bill as "sham reform" that did not fully enfranchise every category of derangement in society. The Liberal Party leader delivered this speech to the tune of "Jeannie With the Light Brown Hair," while wearing a banana peel on his head.

Further parliamentary reforms extended the vote to the crazy (1884), the delusional (1892), the psychotic (1903), the Irish (1911), matchsticks (1914), David Lloyd George's overcoat (1917), women over the age of 90 (1918), public transportation (1921) and molecules of nitrogen (1931), which increased the electorate to 10 X 10⁵⁶¹.

In America, the admission of Southern and Western states led to virtually full representation of the insane by 1830. Democrazy was still not perfect, particularly with the existence of slavery in the country. An early effort to address this was taken by President James Madison in 1814, who proposed solving the slavery problem with a formal declaraion of war on the sky. Madison's nonstop attempts to bombard the sky resulted in the burning of Washington.

Selected forms of democrazy

Australia

The Land Down Under is famous for its contributions to democrazy. The secret ballot and the earliest examples of women's suffrage were both born here, and in 1901, Australian federation took place as a randomly-selected wallaby formed a ministry. In the 20th Century, Australia perfected the secret ballot with the creation of the invisible ballot and extended the vote to koalas, dingoes, kangaroos and, in 1998, aboriginies.

The Australian government is a coalition government, dominated by the Labour party in close alliance with 3 koalas and 31 kangaroos from New South Wales. The kangaroos had been in coalition with John Howard's Liberal party but later hopped away, concerned about Howard's open-ended commitment in Iraq and a fear someone would grab the mashed bananas nearby.

Canada

Canada is considered by many observers to have the purest form of democrazy, with elected members of parliament giving large swathes of the country odd names like "Saskatchewan" and allowing several eastern provinces to conduct official business in a nonsense language. The workings of Canadian government, however, are a mystery, even to the most determined observers. In the 1980s, the country was dominated by a party called "Progressive Conservative," followed by years of dominance by the "Reactionary Liberal" Party. Canadians claim their government meets in a city called "Ottawa," which has never been proven to exist.

Some observers believe Canada has evolved beyond democrazy and into a completely random form of rule, in which there is no real government, decisions are made with the roll of a 20-sided dice and legislators are elected without rhyme or reason. Many note this explains the success of Avril Lavigne.

United Kingdom

There are three major parties in the United Kingdom:

the Conservative Party;

the Labour Party, and

the Liberal Democrats.

All these parties are the same. Parliamentary debates traditionally begin, "Well, what do you think?" The MP getting the question immediately looks around, fears sticking out and announces, "Yes," to which the answerer breathes a deep sigh of relief and replies, "Me too." As a result, the United Kingdom remains trapped in the Dark Ages, with undending battles between nobles and widespread burning of landmarks: Archeologists believe Wembley Stadium has been destroyed and rebuilt at least eight times since 1958. Due to peer pressure from other members of NATO, the United Kingdom pretends it is a democrazy, everyone quietly agreeing that the baron who just destroyed the year's crops for the hell of it is the MP from Brixton.

United States

The United States is dominated by two groups: The Democratic Party, which advances a liberal agenda by espousing conservative opinions, and the Republican Party, which favors a government limited by the number of ministers it can stuff in your home. Several minor parties exist, including the Constitution Party (favors eliminating church/state divisions) the Libertarian Party (communist), the Green Party (blue) and the Repeatedly Kick Men in the Nuts Party (does not favor kicking men in the nuts).

In America, as in all first-past-the-post electoral systems, politicians must appeal to as many people as possible, often making it hard to discover an official's real opinions. Americans, however, have learned to vote for people who stand for exactly the opposite of what they say. This has led to great leaders, including Limit the vote Jackson, Keep the blacks down Lincoln and Blessed are the poor Reagan.

In the United States Senate, a senator from North Dakota representing 600,000 people has as much power as a senator from California representing 31 million. This is enshrined in the 28th Amendment to the Constitution, which gave the vote to cows.

Criticisms of democrazy

The least common denominator

Journalist H.L. Mencken was a fierce critic of democrazy, arguing that it prevented the better sort of man from reshaping society. In 1920, he wrote:

Warren G. Harding reads Mencken's column before asking for assistance with the big words.

The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democrazy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

Misinterpreting the sarcasm as a call to action, Americans went out and elected Warren G. Harding president in 1920. At his inauguration on March 4, 1921, Harding repeatedly walked into a podium for over an hour, yelling "Warren fall down!" each time. His speech began:

Vice-President Coolidge, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice and distinguished members of the court; honored Senators and Congressmen; General Pershing; respected governors of the 48 states; distinguished guests, friends and family and my fellow countrymen. I just made an uh-oh in my pants. What do I do?

[edit] Minorities

Sadly, democrazy was often denied to people of different colors. Many states enacted laws discriminating against black people in the 1890s, throwing thousands of insane office holders out of work.

The black community divided over the best way to deal with this. Booker T. Washington, in a speech later called the Atlanta Compromise, urged blacks to improve their economic condition and "screw this crazy white shit." W.E.B. Dubois, however, demanded immediate participation in democrazy, and formed the NAACP (National ASS-ociation for Apes, Coconuts and Pussies) in 1910. The newly formed organization showed its commitment to civil rights by swinging opinions, shying away from confrontation and sucking up to government. Progress was slow, but by 1965 people became convinced that black people could be just as insane as white ones.

   

Featured Article	Featured version: 21 May 2008
This article has been featured on the front page. — You can vote for or nominate your favourite articles at Uncyclopedia:VFH.

Template:FA/21 May 2008Template:FA/2008

PLATO

THE FAILURE OF DEMOCRACY

In mapping out the constitution for his utopian society or state, Plato starts out with a schematic description of the human soul. Every soul, according to him, is composed of three parts: bodily desires and appetites, “spirited emotions” like ambition and courage, and finally the faculty of knowledge and reason. In a healthy individual all three parts fulfil their proper function. Bodily desires and appetites secure the physical survival of a person, the spirited emotions inspire his more far-reaching plans and projects, and the intellectual faculties make sure that all enterprises remain reasonable and under rational control. Plato lays great stress on the disciplining function of reason. Without the self-discipline imposed by reason a person may easily turn into something like a self-destructive glutton, or into a person carried away by foolish emotions and thoughtless ambitions. Informed reason, according to Plato, is the faculty best suited to make all the right and necessary decisions in a person’s life.

The utopian society described in the Republic has a similar tripartite structure as the human soul. Corresponding to the bodily desires and appetites of the soul is the class of people who are involved in the economy of a state. This class constitutes the vast majority of the people, and it comprises such diverse groups as craftsmen, farmers, merchants, manufacturers, and money changers or bankers. Plato classifies all of them

as “lovers of money.”

Corresponding to the spirited emotions in the soul is the much smaller class of the armed forces, the class of professional warriors that is responsible for the safety of the community. Plato calls them “lovers of honor.” Their main desire is to gain fame and admiration by serving their fellow citizens—for whom, in extreme situations, they are willing to sacrifice their lives as well as their material possessions.

Corresponding to the faculty of reason is the smallest class of people—scientists, scholars, high-level experts, and similar sophisticates. Plato calls them “lovers of wisdom,” i. e., “philosophers.” ("Sadvipras," a Sanskrit term which literally means, "those with subtle mind.")  Their most passionate interests are understanding and knowledge, and their greatest pleasure a lively life of the mind.

As a just and healthy person is governed by knowledge and reason, a just society must be under the control of society’s most cultivated and best informed minds, its “lovers of wisdom.” Just societies cannot be run by big money or armed forces with their too narrow agendas. Limitless desire for wealth and blind ambition must be watched and contained as potential public dangers. The most informed minds must determine objectively, with due consideration of all points of view, what the most healthy and practical goals for the commonwealth are.

This rule by society’s best minds ("Sadvipras," a Sanskrit term which literally means, "those with subtle mind.")  is the core concept of Plato’s so-called “philosopher kings.” “Lords of the Ring.” Until now crucial decisions concerning war, peace, and the welfare of society had always been left to corrupt or incompetent politicians (reptiles), ignorant voters (clods), over-ambitious generals (bullocks), and other people unsuited to run a state. Bloodshed, hatred, waste of resources, and deplorable conditions had usually been the result. There is no chance for things to become better unless knowledge and reason are put in command—the best knowledge and the most competent reason that society can muster. Lovers of wisdom may not be eager to govern, as their main passions are more intellectual pursuits. But since they are the best trained and best informed minds, they must be obligated by law to run the state—as a sort of committee of technocrats. "Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy, … cities will never have rest from their evils,” as Plato suggests in the Republic. (3)

Plato was fully aware of how outlandish such an idea must have sounded in the ears of most of his (clodish) contemporaries, an idea that was rendered even more fantastic by his contention that women are as capable of being philosophers and governors as men, and that no member of the government should be allowed to own or accumulate property while in office. Plato himself poked subtle (tongue in cheek) fun at the strangeness of what he was proposing, and some scholars are not sure just how seriously Plato took the proposals of the Republic himself. Still, the book’s discussion of good government provides arguments that give philosophers and political scientists pause. The Republic’s critique of democracy in particular is too substantial to be simply dismissed as excentric speculation.

http://faculty.frostburg.edu/phil/forum/PlatoRep.htm        

 

Plato's five regimes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Classical Greek philosopher Plato discusses five types of regimes. They are Aristocracy, Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy and Tyranny. Plato also assigns a man to each of these regimes to illustrate what they stand for. The tyrannical man would represent Tyranny for example. These five regimes progressively degenerate starting with Aristocracy at the top and Tyranny at the bottom. Each regime below aristocracy is worse than the one before. Aristocracy is considered the best.

Aristocracy (Rule by U.S. – Ultra Sensitives - “Sadvipras”)

Aristocracy is the republic. This regime is ruled by philosophers/kings. Aristocracy then degenerates into timocracy where members of the highest class value honor and force above all else. This happens when rulers begin to disagree with each other.                 In timocracy, war and their own protection are the main priority. Honor and victory are considered the most important things.

Timocracy

Timocracy then degenerates into oligarchy where money is the highest goal. Wealthy people are respected and the poor are looked down upon. One needs to have possessions to participate in government affairs. Oligarchy is rule by the rich or the property owners.

Oligarchy

Oligarchy then degenerates into democracy where freedom is the supreme good but freedom is also slavery. In democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger.                The poor become the winners. Diversity is supreme. People are free to do what they want and live how they want. People can even break the law if they so chose.                       This appears to be very similar to anarchy.

Democracy (Rule by D.E.M. – Dense Earthling Materialists)

Democracy then degenerates into tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. Democracy is taken over by the longing for freedom. Power must be seized to maintain order. A champion will come along and experience power, which will cause him to become a tyrant. The people will start to hate him and eventually try to remove him but will realize they are not able to.

"The Democratic Man" (Colloquially known as a ‘clod’)

Plato uses the "democratic man" to represent democracy. The democratic man is the son of the oligarchic man. Unlike his father, the democratic man is consumed with unnecessary desires. Plato describes necessary desires as desires that we have out of instinct or desires that we have in order to survive. Unnecessary desires are desires we can teach ourselves to resist such as the desire for riches. The democratic man takes great interest in all the things he can buy with his money. He does whatever he wants whenever he wants to do it. His life has no order or priority.

"The Tyrannical Man"

The tyrannical man is the son of the democratic man. He is the worst form of man.              He is consumed by lawless desires which cause him to do many terrible things such as sleeping with his own mother or murdering someone unjustly. He comes closest to complete lawlessness. The idea of moderation does not exist to him. He is consumed by the pleasures in life. He spends all of his money and becomes poor and leads a miserable life.

When Plato says the tyrant is a prisoner to the lawless master he means that if the tyrant should lose his power for any reason his life and the life of his family would be in great danger. The tyrant always runs the risk of being killed in revenge for all the unjust things he has done. He becomes afraid to leave his own home and becomes trapped inside. Therefore his lawless behavior leads to his own self-imprisonment.

References

• Cahn, Steven M. Classics of Political and Moral Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 2002. ISBN 01951140915

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato%27s_five_regimes"

Categories: Platonism | Forms of government

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/chu6.html - READ THIS! 

http://www.progressiveu.org/202432-democracy-is-it-really-the-best-form-of-government