Re: DSM: why democracy


John Axtell (newlife@theofficenet.com)
Tue, 27 Mar 2001 08:21:25 -0800


David,

So if I understand your conclusion a free school following the SV model would do just as
well being run using a republican governing process as a democratic governing process.
Is this the correct understanding of your position?

John

David Rovner wrote:

> Just some thoughts on the subject: "why do you feel democracy is a better way
> to run a school than a republican form of government ?"
> (John Axtell newlife@theofficenet.com Mon, 26 Mar 2001 11:31:06 -0800)
>
> As Einstein said (I think he did): "everything is relative";
> for instance: Mexico is a Republic -- would you say it is a Democracy?
>
> As Daniel Greenberg wrote:
> "'Democracy' seems to mean many things to many people. To the regimes
> of Eastern Europe it designates (designated, actually.- d.r.) an autocratic one-party
> rule conducted for the presumed benefit of the masses . . ."
>
> Is U.S.A. a Democracy?
>
> Ayn Rand claimed that a Welfare State is not a Democratic Nation -- it does not
> protect
> the Rights of Individuals.
>
> Regime in a nation -- I agree with Ayn Rand -- is intimately related with economy
> in that nation.
>
> You don't have a Democracy if you have a Welfare State -- a Mixed Economy:
> a mixture in varying degrees of freedom and controls, of voluntary choice and
> government coercion, of capitalism and statism.
>
> Regime in school is not intimately related with economy.
>
> It is not right to compare regime in a nation with regime at school.
>
> So you can't say: democracy is a better way -- or a worse way --
> to run a school than a republican form of government.
>
> School and nation must be seen in a different scale. They must be seen --
> in this sense -- as different, as social organizations.
>
> David
>
> .



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:17:30 EST