>>49
"I never attempted to justify the ethics of tyrants. The rest of the paragraph is obsolete by this fact."
Haha. "Ethics of Tyrants". OK that's some cute wordplay dipshit but that's not what's up for discussion.
Simplified version: Slavery, Colonization, Foregin Policy designed to cripple and control other countries economically...even when done under a democractic system = Tyrannical Behavior.
You inability to address this = Massive Failure.
I do not support criminal acts. From now on have the common courtesy to quote me when I support unethical acts.
Why would you ever come right out and say: "In exchange for Democracy's tyrannical behavior and heavy-handed out-right destructive nature- we get Democracy abroad and stronger Democracy at home. So it's all good." ?
A quote from you is not even nessacary because your statement already implied by your unwillingness to admonish these bahaviors (past and present) for what they are: The behaviors of an undemocratic tyrannical republic.
You are free to report them to the police and post/link what you believe proves that these crimes are taking place on this message board.
You already know of the crimes that have been committed. (Slavery, Colonization, Western Foreign policy, etc)
Again: We're not arguing if these crimes that Democracy has committed, actually exist. History tells us they do. What we are discussing here is your ability to give Democracy a "pass" when they, for instance....institutionalize inequality and inspire terrorism and other atrocities- direct or indirectly- through their foreign policy.
"Tyranny makes it astronomically easier for criminals to enter positions of power and commit devastating crimes, therefore democracy is more desirable."
Proof? There were always be a criminal element in government. Because there's always malice in hearts of men. The idea that one idealogy or another has this market cornered is laughable.
But I suppose your last sentence ends this argument, even though I don't believe a word of what you say.