Democracy

Democracy is good in the aspect of: · Holding free and fair elections. · Having public debate on issues · Equality being recognised by law · No discrimination based on religion,caste,creed,gender etc · Universal Adult Suffrage · Right to form organisations and protest. However, there are some aspects of democracy that remain in principle and not in practice: · Though free and fair elections are held, not everyone is able to contest in the elections. Only people with money and power are able to form parties and contest in the elections. This is because elections incur expenses that cannot be met by the poorer strata's of society, should they wish to contest elections · Though there are public debates on issues, not each and every issue is open to public debate and even if there are debates, decisions are taken without peoples consent. E.g. the passing of the Lok BAL bill was in favour of the citizens of the entire country. However, the govt. has still not taken any measures to pass this bill. · The govt. is not completely free from corruption. · Democracy takes a long time to take decisions because of deliberation and negotiation in assemblies. E.g. the decision regarding the 2G scam has been going on for years and currently 4G has come up. · There are vast economic disparities as well. However, in spite of all this we can assure that democracy is a better form of government as it is legitimate . It is a govt of the people, by the people and for the people. It has transformed subjects to citizens

The most basic concepts of democracy are as follows:

1. Necessity of compromise

2. Equality of all persons

3. Majority rule with minority rights

4. Individual Liberty

5. Worth of the individual

It means that it only works when everyone participates. Democracy only has any meaning when everyone is voting.

Many of the principles of democracy require a certain amount of active, informed and watchful citizens. This is why restrictions on free speech or censorship of the press are so harmful to a democracy.

Democracy as a regime type is actually on the rise. More and more countries are declaring themselves to be democracies or are authoritarian regimes that are making more of their decisions using democratic means. However, there are a number of powerful countries that were formerly liberal democracies that are increasingly becoming illiberal democracies such as Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela. These countries are becoming increasingly non-democratic as a backlash against the growth of Western power and to prevent the erosion of or re-solidify traditional structures.

To be a good sport with otheres, following the pillars of charecter.

the largest country in Asia is Russia.

but it is also part of Europe.

It's government is technically a republic, which means the citizens themselves do not govern the country (which is true democracy). In republics, citizens exercise their power through voting for people to represent them. The representatives they elect will make decisions/ govern the country for them. True democracy, in fact, rarely exists, and many countries choose instead to be a form of republic democracies.

Canada is a parliamentary democracy. The head of state is technically the Queen of England, who is represented in Canada by the Governor General, who acts as head of state on the Queen's behalf--thus, Canada is a kingdom. However, the Governor General/Queen have no true political power, which rests entirely with the legislature (parliament). Parliament has a lower house called the House of Commons; the prime minister and cabinet are all members of this house. The upper house of Parliament is the Senate, which is minimal political power, and its members are appointed for life by the Governor General/Queen.

Each province of Canada is also a kind of mini-kingdom/parliamentary democracy: the Queen's official representative and acting head of state of each province is the Lieutenant Governor, and then each province has a parliament, structured very much like the federal parliament except that the political head of a province is not a prime minister but a "premier."

Canada has an politically separate court system as well, headed by the Supreme Court.

The logistics of bringing every decision to the plebiscite would grind daily government making to an halt. Therefore, indirect democracies, in theory, send representatives from smaller and smaller groups into a tiered decision making processes. The representatives vote on behalf hundreds, and the representative of the hundreds vote on behalf of the tens of thousands, and so forth. Since the entire electorate is not voting on the issue, the democracy is indirect.

Athenian democracy was developed in the Greek city-state of Athens, comprising the central city-state of Athens and the surrounding territory of Attica, around 500 BC. Athens was one of the very first known democracies. Yet, despite all the ahistorical descriptions which accompanied the celebrations for the 2,500 years of democracy, the Athenian democracy was not completed with Cleisthenes. It took another twenty or thirty years before election by lot was first introduced for the archons 487 B.C.Cand for the property criterion which excluded the lower strata from higher offices to be abolished after the battle of Plataia, in 479 B.C. Finally, almost another twenty years had to pass for the Areios Pagos to be deprived of its privileges, which were transferred to the Assembly of the People, the Council of the Five Hundred, and the jury courts. The foundations of this democracy were not solid, however, and that is the cause of the decline, which led to its final disappearance once set in motion. The economic factors that supported Pericles' political democracy disappeared quickly. First, the relative economic equality, brought about by the Persian Wars, was completely temporary.

Said by G. B Shaw

YASIN A S

kalmandapam,palakkad.

kerala,India.

9446962321

9061483321

yasin.as.66@gmail.com

China is a communist country that is ruled by a dictator, called a Chairman. The government, controlled by The Chairman, owns every media outlet and many manufacturing and industrial firms. The state mandates every aspect of the lives of it's people, including the oppression and torture of those who dare to speak out against it. The Chinese Communist Party enacts genocides to prevent any question on it's authority, then uses it's control over the media to convince it's citizens that it is protecting their best interests (by calling the groups eradicated, "Evil", "Cults", "Spies", etc. and portraying them negatively on TV, radio, internet, and newspaper). Although China makes American goods available through an economy that is gradually capitalizing, it holds a iron stake at the heart of freedom and fearlessly plunges it's filthy fingers into the eyes of those who dare oppose it's absolute rule.

In a democracy, we are most concerned with ensuring that people will have the right to choose their rulers and people will have control over the rulers. If they do not work properly , people can overthrow them. . Whenever possible and necessary, citizens should be able to participate in decision making, that affects them all. Thus, democracy produces an accountable government.

In a democracy you have majority rules. The can make whatever law they want because they have no constitution or charter to limit them. The USA doesn't have a democracy. It has a federal constitutional republic which is supposed to rule based on the constitution. It's meant to be limited by what the constitution allows.

Socialism

It was direct democracy - the citizens in council directed government. America has representative democracy - citizens elect representatives to Congress.

Value ancient Greeks and "News". ....

Dawn, 06/01/1962: "More than 150 scientists from the University and the Academy of Moscow have agreed wholeheartedly with the scientific view of Mr. Mars Poulianos underlined the seriousness of the work and not stingy on their expressions spoke verylaudatory words about him. Dr S. A. Tokarev, professor of ethnography at the University of Moscow and head of the Department of Ethnography of the peoples of Europe at the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences in Moscow, said:

The work of Aris N. Poulianos exceptional interest for the ethnographic science. The pooled and treated statistically huge stock of anthropological research among the Greeks first time introduces a new kind of science sources for the study of a crucial problem, as is the origin of the Greek people. So far on this issue in science has been generally accepted view that modern Greeks historically have very little in common with the ancient Greeks the founders of the ancient culture that modern Greeks for the most part represent descendants of Slavs, Albanians and other peoples metokisan Greece and merged with the Greeks of the Byzantine era. Unlike the author of this thesis, convincingly and based on similar material, shows that whatever the influence of the Slavs and other peoples who came into contact with the Greeks, the people of modern Greece is basically a descendant of the ancient population of the Balkans and the islands of the Aegean.

The renowned anthropologist at the University of Moscow, Dr. J. J. Rogkinsky notes that the southern part of the Balkans is in Europe, where crossing the broad border zone between the area of ​​Dinaric and prosthiasiatikis race. So in this area can be found some of the general problems of classification of the peoples of Europe and the Asian front. "In addition it should be noted that in this work finds its position and the criticism of racist constructs connection with the acquisition of ancient Greek culture." (Note: You mean the racist theories that argue that modern Greeks are not descendants of the ancient and that is why their culture is far less developed countries. However, beyond the unrealistic correlation - if, for example, compare the traditions - the scientific confirmation of the biological continuity of the Greeks proves once again that it is mainly geographical and socio-historical conditions that shape the cultural level of a nation).

"The director of the Anthropology Division of the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences in Moscow Dr M. C. Levine said: ... It may seem paradoxical to note that many people in Europe were studied anthropological worse than the people of Australia, Melanesia and other distant countries. Among the countries of Europe, Greece is one of the least studied ... The work of A. N. Poulianos fills this gap. The author holds the full methodology of anthropological research, strictly complied all the necessary conditions and given the appropriate attention.

The director of the Anthropological Institute and Museum of Anthropology of Moscow Dr. B. P. Giakimof said: "My view is that the work of A. N. Poulianos represents the most perfect summary for the Anthropology of the Greeks."

On the other side of the Atlantic, the U.S., the director of the Anthropology Department of the Smithsonian Institute G.. L. Angels in American Journal of Physical Anthropology (American Journal of Physical Anthropology No. 22, vol 5, 1964, p. 343) in book review of "Origin of the Greeks" writes: "Mars Poulianos ... correctly concludes that a full genetic continuity from ancient to contemporary times ...».

NEWS, 01.25.1962: "The scientific research of A. N. Poulianos rejects the dogmatic theory misellinos Fallmerayer German historian, who lived 1790-1861, the era of Greek struggle for independence - and who (Falmerayer) quite dogmatically, ie without prior anthropological research - and therefore unscientific aftapodeiktos - tried to support his theory ekslavismou Greece. The researcher concludes that anthropological research with the necessary historical and linguistic evidence is required to solve problems ethnogenetic.

This is a reflection of all past and therein lies the historic value. If the past helps us to understand this, this helps us to imagine the future.

KRITES - Aegean - Peloponnese - SARAKATSANA

Then Mars Poulianos studied about 10,000 more people and hundreds of skeletons from various regions of Eurasia. The groups of Greeks who were less represented in the doctoral thesis (Aegean Peloponnese Pindus) were studied in 1965 with his return to Greece.

THE ORIGIN OF CRETE - ISLANDS

The main conclusion (A. Poulianos, 1971, 1999) is that the modern population of Crete (in a sample of 3,000 persons) and all the Aegean with the mainland of Thrace and Asia Minor remained unchanged at least from the Minoan era and is native to the Aegean anthropological type. Migrations made at various times brought slight changes, but did not change the morphology of the original type. The effects do not exceed 1-3% and this shows again the consistency of the indigenous inhabitants in general of the Aegean basin, at least since the Mesolithic era, ie before 15,000 years.

In 1987 the Italian anthropology professor J.. Fakinos announced at the 2nd World Congress in Turin Paleoanthropology of the existence of human skeleton from the island 50,000 years, which indeed shows the morphology of the modern (Homo sapiens) and not neantertaleiou man. The news never reached the Greek media, as the Ministry of Culture has so far shown his usual indifference.

In 1999 the medical journal Tissue Antigens (Tissue Antigens, Vol 53, January) published an article about hematologic origin of the Cretans. The basic conclusion that ... Cretans are closest to the Berbers, the Semites and the Japanese than with the other Greeks (who came from somewhere north 4000 years ago in Greece) and that ... so it is unlikely that African and Middle Eastern origin of Cretan 10,000 years ago. Article 7 Spaniards signed with 3 Greek professor of medicine and unfortunately come to their conclusions lightly represented as only 135 inhabitants and only studied the gene HLA. Also, unethical move, ie without taking into account the past and of course more reliable methodology anthropological literature (phenotype, ie the external anthropological traits representing thousands of genes). Thus, in the literature are not found and the work of A. Murad ("The distribution of human blood groups and other polymorphisms, ed Oxf., 1976, p. 1055), indicating that no reliable study of the HLA gene because, with it came the unfounded conclusion that the Basques, Icelanders and the Congolese are related to each other more than any other populations. It may be noted however that since 1965, had not yet even started the bio-molecular comparison of human DNA, have sprung up such views, followed by others and, oddly coordinated in the same direction (eg see NEW YORK TIMES - "Cretans labeled non-Greek people", 17/4/1966, in spite of contrary posts eight 15/4/1966 Greek newspapers such as Daily: The population of Crete abode anthropologikos unchanged since the Neolithic period (see and a specific page).

From the historical, linguistic and archaeological reports of the above contributors haematologist, it becomes obvious that they are aware of such issues, and acrobatics into a patchwork of specialty unproven assumptions. For example, say: when the Sahara dried up 10,000 years before, perhaps the Berbers migrated to Crete and established the Minoan civilization. So instead look at (the Berbers) how to survive, they built ships, who had time and migrated en masse?. Not even the writers have reflected whether the Cretans thalassokratorias traveling in reverse, as reported by numerous sources? It was 10,000 years before the era of the last cataclysm? The Sahara dried up before 5500 years (see Sarah Simpson, Scientific American Oct. 1999). If it was not the proverbial often fanciful those who do not have the education to deal comprehensively with similar issues, one could perceive the very top that are similar to considerations of Cyprus, and not just as a bad joke. But we bring as an example of the above article from Tissue Antigens to apparent how easy it is someone, intentionally or not, irrelevant to lathepsei. Only regret is the threshold of the third millennium there are journals that publish uncritically such "works, while".

THE POPULATION OF PELOPONNISOU

Preliminary communication research ("Human", 1977, vol 4, p. 5-36) made under the guidance of the Martian Poulianos Pitsios, who confirmed the basic conclusions of the "Origin of the Greeks, and completed the relevant anthropological data with anthropometry 1582 people. In 1978 he published in a separate version with the words "Library of the Anthropological Association of Greece, No. 2, dedicated (with love) to his teacher.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------

Greek geneticist working in the U.S. believe that the analysis of genetic material from ancient bones and teeth will soon reveal the origin of the Mycenaeans and Minoans.

The ongoing investigations have shown that the Greeks living in the Mediterranean by 2900 BC, about 1,000 years more than believed until now.

As explained by Dr. George Stamatoyannopoulos, a professor at the University of Washington in Seattle: "The survey is intended to diagnose [...] the DNA of the ancient Greeks and to determine their origin, whether they came from the north, where they came from the steppes Russia or Central Europe, if then.

The team, which includes scientists from Greece, has made a genetic analysis of approximately 50 and 30 teeth Minoans Mycenaeans. Searches are now almost as many specimens preserved pulp to make it possible to draw conclusions.

Regardless, a group of researchers at the University of Manchester genetic techniques to examine the bones discovered by Schliemann in the royal tombs of Mycenae, to see if the dead were family members or unrelated persons.

Mr. Stamatoyannopoulos believes that, apart from information on the movements and relations of the Greek population, once the genetic testing will offer other items such as spiritual characteristics of our ancient ancestors.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------

According to research by Professor Constantine Trianatfyllidi Department of Biology, Aristotle 75% - 80% of the current mitochondrial DNA of Greek origin and has palaioloithiki formed after three waves of different movements, from 50,000 to 9,000 years ago. This research was conducted in 143 men and 2,400 Greek males of other populations (Europe, Mediterranean, Asia Minor, Africa and China).

Paternal DNA

DNA is the male ancestors (fathers) us.

According to his analysis of the genetic composition of the present inhabitants of Europe are the result of two migratory movements: 1) During the Paleolithic period and 2) during the Neolithic period that occurred from east to west

Mother DNA

Is DNA Ancestry women (mothers) us.

Besides the above two migrations occurred earlier and another one in the opposite direction from above. People in this case team moved from Europe to the Middle East. This explains the fact that 5% - 20% of the sequences of mitochondrial DNA of the inhabitants of the Middle East has a European origin.

Relationship between the Greeks and other populations

All evidence suggests that the genetic continuity of the Greek people with very little intermingling of the neighboring white populations, and none of Negro and Mongolian.The genetic composition of the Greeks at a rate of 99.6% Caucasian, white. The contribution of other groups is very low (0.4%). For reasons apparently religious, cultural or linguistic Greeks have not been largely intermingling with neighboring nations.

Similarities Greeks with neighboring nations

1) The Balkan populations: compared the gene frequencies of several polymorphic systems among the population of Greece and Bulgaria. The results showed that differences in the genetic evidence does not allow us to talk about common ancestry of the other Balkan peoples to the Greeks. The teacher refers to rates if necessary to mention.

2) Mediterranean populations: The conclusions of the study the genetic relatedness of Mediterranean populations revealed that the Greeks have particular affinity with the Italians. Nearly 22% of the Y chromosome of the inhabitants of Apulia (southern Italy) comes from the Greeks.

-If you made a classification based on the degree of genetic relatedness between the Greeks and other peoples of the northern Mediterranean, we would say that first of all the Greeks like the Italians, after the French, after the last Spanish and Turkish- says the professor.

To conclude the above evidence of overestimation of the migratory movements (Slavs, etc.). In fact, the movement of such people was very small and disorganized because of the difficulties of those times to try to greatly affect the basic genetic structure of local residents.

freedom for citizens good facilities being good enhough to hande people

AFHahidikajaj iids;;wjhfyu sheyhnans dhhnahjd ahsj ahdyydns ka'soodkwmdd

The U.S.A, The United Kingdom, France, Norway, China and Germany.

The person that wrote this first answer is an idiot. the USA is not a democracy and China is communist.

A true democracy doesn't exist and also it is impossible to exist- excepting SF books; the so-called democracies from today are false democracies. They are ochlocraties, judeocracies, masked teocracies or dictatures, plutocracy (or bankers rule), etc.

A republic is also called a representative democracy.

No. The revolution lasted from 1789 until 1799. After that, France was uncontrollable and did not know who or how it should (be) governed. That is when Napoleon Bonaparte took his chance and came to power, making France an Empire. He crowned himself Emperor and from than on, France was under dictatorship.

After Napoleon, his son Napoleon II came to power, but he died 2 weeks after his succession.

After Napoleon II, count de Provence (the younger brother of Louis XVI, who had always been jealous of his older brother and had stabbed him in the back for many times) succeeded him calling himself Louis XVIII. This made France a monarchy again. After Louis XVIII, count D'Artois (also a younger brother of Louis XVI) succeeded him calling himself Charles X. And so on, and so on. The real democracy came to France in 1874 when they officially became (as during the revolution) a Republic. Only because Henri D'Artois (grandson of Charles X) declined to enter the throne as King of France, because he did not want to accept the tricolor flag, the symbol of the revolution which he hated very much.