5 Answers

  1. There are about as many freedoms and democracies in the world as people need them. Freedom implies choice, risk and responsibility, which a small part of people perceive as an advantage, and the majority-as a burden. And most people want to get rid of their freedom and responsibility by entrusting it all to their superiors. With democracy, it is about the same, who is afraid to be free, looking for someone to join. Probably, the lower the risk of being held responsible for the wrong choice in society, and the easier it is to correct its consequences, the more likely it is that people will prefer freedom. In private life, such a factor is various forms of social support for the unemployed, the poor, the sick, etc. And in political life, democracy is a mechanism for bloodless correction of incorrect political elections. In general, yes, democracy-ensures maximum freedom in the political process.

  2. A question of definitions.

    In the modern world, there are many things on which there is a broad consensus among people – ” this is freedom.” And there is a lot of consensus on “this is democracy”.

    And in the modern world, there are people who are free not to share this consensus and believe that freedom is when there is no need to work, and democracy is only as it was in ancient Greece. Here for them there is neither freedom nor democracy, they have chosen such definitions of these words. Some choose such definitions, according to which freedom and democracy do not just exist, but can not exist at all, never and nowhere.

  3. There is always freedom, just go into the forest at 500m, and you can be absolutely free: you can undress, tousle your hair, swear loudly, eat the ground, etc.

    Is there freedom in society? No, any society is a set of self-restrictions.

  4. It may seem that “freedom “is a subjective category that does not concern anyone but its own owner, and” democracy”, on the contrary, is a purely public thing, and in reality both are just words in which everyone puts their own meaning.

    I mean, it's actually impossible to discuss them without a lot of assumptions, like “the majority thinks so” or”the majority needs so”.

    This is nonsense, most people are not interested in either one or the other AND DO the RIGHT THING!

  5. There is. And the main occupation of politicians is to share this freedom. Who gets how much. There can't be freedom for everyone and everything at once.

    Your freedom to sing in the street is the duty of those under whose windows you sing, it is to listen. Or their freedom to throw rotten tomatoes out of windows limits your freedom to sing.

    If a certain freedom needs legislative consolidation, it means that it infringes on someone's interests.

    The answer to the first question is: there is freedom, there is no absolute freedom.

    And with democracy, the same crap 🙂

    Democracy, as an opportunity for every citizen to participate in government, is almost everywhere. The mechanisms of this participation and the degree of influence on government decisions are very different. But it can't be high. The state is already more stupid than the individual. With absolute direct democracy, this will be a complete disaster.

Leave a Reply