Well ................
Submitted by alan h on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 11:16In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
no barely Italy has a continual political crisis - from 1860 onwards, mainly because it isnt a country. IMO as soon as the onorevoli have got their 3 years service, and therefore 8000 euros pension a month, for life - they will be happy to vote down the government, but as usual they look after themselves before anyone else. Vergogna. EVen though he has 'confidence' he wont manage to pass any laws. It makes Reagans lame duck presidency look positively vibrant.
He must be doing
Submitted by Casa Monal on Fri, 12/17/2010 - 15:09In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
You assume that Italians vote for Berlusconi - Italy has a flawed democracy that comes below Estonia, China and just above Botswana in the world listings. The government is not answerable to the voters, and the voters dont really vote for an MP, votes are bought and sold, as are MPs and cushy jobs. When the incumbent PM can spend 3 times as much on his election campaign as all the other parties, and owns the majority of TV and other media, is it any wonder that he 'wins' ?
Oops well we know what
Submitted by Casa Monal on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 05:13Oops well we know what the word assume means: to make an ass-out of –u & me Italy sounds no different to any other so called democratic government. We are talking politicians here…people who couldn’t make it in the ‘real world’. Having said that, Berlusconi could just be the exception to that rule...
I think that he is probably
Submitted by Joy on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 16:05In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
Italy vs UK
Submitted by SirTK on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 03:48In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
Democracy is by definition
Submitted by Annec on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 08:03In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
DEMOCRACY AND ARISTOCRACY
Submitted by Gala Placidia on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:27In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
As we all know, in ancient Athens, the birthplace of democracy, women, foreigners, and slaves were denied the vote. People of power or influence weren't concerned with the rights of such non-citizens. It was more of an aristocracy (the power of the best, or those who consider themselves to be the best...) It looks as if things have not changed much in the past 2,600 years......
democracy versus aristocracy
Submitted by Ram on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:57In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
I have to take issue with you Gaia on ancient Greece. it was not an aristocracy but a democracy in that every free citizen had an obligation to be part of the democracy for a fee of 3 obols a day, when they were drawn by lot. Slaves and women you are right could not vote, but all men had to by law. Things changed when the Romans took over, and it all went downhill from there! SirTK - I could happily criticise the UK system but I am not eligible to vote in the Uk, and don't live there. I live and pay taxes and vote in Italy.
NOT VERY DEMOCRATIC
Submitted by Gala Placidia on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 13:56In reply to A newbie all over again! by Annec
Sorry, Ram, but I have to disagree regarding Athenian "democracy" and figures back this opinion which is not only mine. During the 4th Century BC there would have been some 300.000 people in Attica. Of those, citizen families, the only ones who enjoyed "democracy" or the "people's power" would have amounted to some 100,000 and of those, only 30,00 would have been adult males entitled to vote. Slaves accounted for most of the other inhabitants. Not all of the people entitled to vote would exercise their rights. Slavery was widespread and there were plenty of "mettics", the descendants of citizens and slave women, who were not entitled to any citizenship rights. Anyway, the so called "democracy" was replaced by an "aristocracy", which, at least was not so hypocritical...