Democracy is the twin-sister of capitalism.

[DR MEHMOODZAI]

It was the great industrial revolution that resulted in the rise of both Adam Smith's no-holds-barred Capitalism, and its aggressive antidote---Karl Marx's Communisin. The two diagonally opposite philosophies are however not as recent as the names of Adam Simth and Karl Max may suggest. They have been running parallel to each other for tens of centuries---civilization after civilization. It has in essence been a conflict between the power of the 'haves' and the powerlessness of the 'have-nots'. And in this conflict, history has been overwhelmingly on the side of the power-wielding 'haves'---who as kings, traders, money-makers, land-owners and feudal lords have virtually dominated all the known civilizations--- except the one that had been founded by the Prophet of Islam (Peace Be Upon Him) in the years after his epoch-making journey from Makkah the hub of capitalism in that era--- to Madina--- the oasis which was to become the capital of the world's first state in which the have-nots would have the decisive say in practically all the key matters.
Of course this state was short-lived. The empowerment of 'the hitherto-powerless' have-nots came to an end in a Mosque of Kufa when an outlaw named Abdul Rahman bin Muljm's sword dealt a fatal blow to Hazrat Ali, the fourth Caliph of Islam. But for those four decades after the world's first written constitution was promulgated by the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) as Charter of Madina, the concept of the rule of the people (in the name of God) by the people (the deputies of God), for the people (the subjects of God) remained in vogue in letter and in spirit.
The modern world has adopted that concept as democracy---but ironically this adoption has not empowered the have-nots as was the case in Madina, but forcefully reconfirmed the power of the 'haves' who have ruled most civilizations since the dawn of history.
Democracy is the twin-sister of capitalism.

 

[JIJA_JI]

It was the great industrial revolution that resulted in the rise of both Adam Smith's no-holds-barred Capitalism, and its aggressive antidote---Karl Marx's Communisin. The two diagonally opposite philosophies are however not as recent as the names of Adam Simth and Karl Max may suggest. They have been running parallel to each other for tens of centuries---civilization after civilization. It has in essence been a conflict between the power of the 'haves' and the powerlessness of the 'have-nots'. And in this conflict, history has been overwhelmingly on the side of the power-wielding 'haves'---who as kings, traders, money-makers, land-owners and feudal lords have virtually dominated all the known civilizations--- except the one that had been founded by the Prophet of Islam (Peace Be Upon Him) in the years after his epoch-making journey from Makkah the hub of capitalism in that era--- to Madina--- the oasis which was to become the capital of the world's first state in which the have-nots would have the decisive say in practically all the key matters.
Of course this state was short-lived. The empowerment of 'the hitherto-powerless' have-nots came to an end in a Mosque of Kufa when an outlaw named Abdul Rahman bin Muljm's sword dealt a fatal blow to Hazrat Ali, the fourth Caliph of Islam. But for those four decades after the world's first written constitution was promulgated by the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) as Charter of Madina, the concept of the rule of the people (in the name of God) by the people (the deputies of God), for the people (the subjects of God) remained in vogue in letter and in spirit.
The modern world has adopted that concept as democracy---but ironically this adoption has not empowered the have-nots as was the case in Madina, but forcefully reconfirmed the power of the 'haves' who have ruled most civilizations since the dawn of history.
Democracy is the twin-sister of capitalism.

Capitalism is, the only and the best form of socialism.

 

[KabirfFan]

What is the alternative then. Socialism has failed as well. I think a good society is the one that has the right mixture of both. Poor has existed throughout known history and will continue to exist.

 

[adonis_look]

Democracy is the best amongst available options.. At least you don't have royal intrigue and murder like days of Khalifah everytime new ruler has to be installed.

At least people have say in who they elect..

Socialism well that nonsense of a system has failed zillion times.. in China alone socialism ended up killing 50-60 million people