RE: The dictator's ultimate punishment - Forgotten!
I guess the difference between the old leaders like Nicolae Ceausescu and the (somehow) new ones is that the old leaders cared about their people. Ceausescu cared about the faith of his population, he provided some minimum food and shelter for the people at that time. I can say that in defense of my words, even if many are saying that when he was leading, people had less food than they have now, well... Right now the entire supply of food on the entire planet has increased with about 50% in a couple of decades. So for that time, people had pretty much food and shelter.
As a difference, today, neither the president, nor the government care if some people are starving or not. Nobody cares about homeless and they are a lot. The number of hospitals and schools being built is nothing compared to the number of churches. I can go on like that for a while but I am trying to make just one point:
There are always bad parts and also good parts related to one thing!
And so was Ceausescu's leadership... it was not perfect, actually it was far away from that point, but it had its good parts that some people forget about. For sure that times were bad for the country but they were not entirely this way.
I am not a communist, but I don't think that the communist is entirely bad and neither that capitalism is entirely good.
The perfect system does not exists and if some people think that they are living in a total democracy right now, then there may be some bad news they should hear:
It looks like democracy, it feels like democracy, but is it really democracy?
That was what I had to say, hope you don't mind and understand my point, even if you can disagree with it :)
PS: contributed from my phone, if there are any mispells, I will edit them later.
No reason to disagree with you. It was not the point of my post to discuss the Ceausescu regime as compared to our present situation, as I don't think many outside our country are interested. Fortunately, we have come to that point when we can talk about this without any passion. Many of his wrongs can be understood when you take them into the wider context, the times he lived in.
As for democracy, the truth is, I think, we do live in a democracy, only we had a different idea about democracy.. we thought, back then, democracy - by Western standards- must be Heaven on Earth. Well, it isn't - neither here, nor in the West...
Some may care, and there are others from our country here also. About that democracy, I don't really believe we are living in it. Democracy is when the people, the majority of the citizens of one state are having control over how the things are going and what decisions are made.
I don't believe that neither in the most advanced countries, we are facing a good and healthy system without people manipulation, corruption or just a few taking decision in their favor, neglecting the masses that voted for them.
No, there is no such system.
The west was guaranteed a Republican form of government, not a Democracy. Democracy is mob rule and are completely interchangeable concepts. The best way to illustrate the concept of demo (mob) cracy (rule) is the majority voting to eat the minority for dinner.
The rule of the mob, or the majority is Don't Vote, in effect the only mandate that was ever passed and continues unprecedented today is Don't Vote as 2/3rd of Americans voice their opinions of mob rule every four years, all other mandates aren't even close to majority.