pastafarian
Well-known member
OK, let's give it another shot. There is no logical distinction between Democracy, the Stock Exchange, Christianity, Capitalism, Voodooism, Money, Communism, UK legal system, Islam etc. They are all belief systems imagined and developed by people to solve problems and order society. Yes, some may appear more tangible than others but they are nevertheless artificial, social constructs with no reliance on the physics, chemistry or biology of the real world.
You insist that Democracy is "real and true" and imply that Religion isn't.
How many hundreds of thousands of churches and temples have been built in the world; would you say that those buildings are "real and true"? Our latest form of Democracy (First-past-the-post, men & women over 18) also has a glorious temple on the banks of the Thames. They are all the tangible artefacts of imagined belief systems.
How many millions of people have been killed in the name of Christ? Would you say all those deaths are "real and true"? The UK has also killed millions of people in the name of our Democracy (& Capitalism). They are all the tangible effects of imagined belief systems
Christianity promises that if you lead a good life you will be rewarded after death.
It really is that simple and although some might say the reward is illusory, if you believe in the message then you have complete control over whether you live for all eternity in heaven or hell.
UK Democracy promises that if you vote for someone and you don't like what they do during the next 5 years then your reward will be that you can decide not to vote for them next time (i.e after the event). Of course, it may be that the political party to which your representative belongs decides on a policy that neither of you find acceptable. Or it may be that your representative agrees with some of your beliefs but not others. Or you may decide that it is a political party you support and not their representative. Or it might be that you support the party aims and the personality of their representative equally. Or it might be that you support the representative because they take a particular stance on a single issue about which you feel strongly. Or your representative might decide to cross the floor and change their party allegiance. Or it might be that you have a single issue about which you feel strongly that is supported by a party whose general beliefs you find unacceptable. Or you feel strongly about an issue that is not supported by any party. Or it might be that you believe that proportional representation is much better than first-past-the-post (voters in the top 10% of constituencies wield 30 times more power than the least influential). Or that vote weighting is better than one person one vote (in 2010 more than half of all voters voted against their winning MP). Or Democracy is wrong (in the safest of seats your vote is virtually worthless). And this doesn't take into account all those hidden decisions and accommodations taken by the mandarins in Her Majesty's civil service that are not subject to your accountability scrutiny. Or those decisions influenced by powerful political lobby groups or UK/global business interests (e.g. Harold Macmillan's minister for transport determining a third of Britain's railways should be removed whilst holding significant business interests in road construction).
It really is even more complicated than that and although some might say the reward is illusory, if you believe in the message then you will subject your representative and/or his party to accountability.
The reason that both Christianity and Democracy look remarkably like belief systems is because that is what they are.
You don't answers any of my questions but continue to plug away with your accountability mantra. That's blind faith for you.
Nope, still doesn’t do it for me.
you will have to come up with an actual real argument if you want to convince me over to your stance that democracy and accountability are of little consequence.
10/10 for trying though.