OK, I'll bite. If government needs the "consent" of the governed, just how
is that consent conveyed unless the governed have a voice? And if the
governed *do* have a voice, how is that not democracy again?
-Zero (still confused)
Learn how your computer can earn you money while you sleep!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Samantha Atkins" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 6:06 PM
Subject: RE: election
> The part where you implied that "of the people..." meant "in other words,
> democracy". That is clearly not what the founders had in mind by that
> phrasing. They meant that government could only derive *just* powers by
> consent of the governed as an extension to the inalienable rights of the
> governed. This limitation on government is not simply democracy.
> - samantha
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Zero Powers
> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 9:18 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: election
> Did you misread my post? I said it's *not* a perfect democracy. What
> of my post are you calling "false?" I'm confused.
> Learn how your computer can earn you money while you sleep!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:21 MDT