• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Founding Fathers Visiting Egypt

Yes, but that's just looking at the lucky few in hindsight. History is littered with far more examples of presidents than prime ministers who became dictators.

Perhaps in absolute numbers... but Hitler (Chancellor in Germany is akin to a PM) is the 800-pount gorilla on the parliamentary back...

As far as I can tell, there's no clear reason why presidentialism would be better suited for certain cultures/demographics than others, so I would rather see Egypt go with the odds and adopt a parliamentary system. It's true that no country should adopt a "cookie-cutter democracy" and will need to adjust the exact structure of government to its own needs...but I do think that most should go with a system that has demonstrated a high probability of success rather than one that has demonstrated a high probability of failure, absent a compelling reason to do otherwise.

I do think demographics matter. Korea is a highly homogenous society, much more so than Taiwan's but even Taiwan's is more homogenous than Egypt's. U.S. is an exception and as such, its system does not have to be exported in total around the world. Taiwan's system combines elements of the American system and traditional Chinese ideas from a man who received an American education and is highly revered here.

perhaps I am rambling, but in Egypt, with so many groups, there needs to be a strong system that can represent those groups. The U.S. DOES have this with its Congress, but a winner-take-all presidential system could cause problems amongst minority groups unless they feel they have representation... it really depends on how Egypt does it. Iraq really made some mistakes. A federal system (people also forget this element in a governmental structure) would have far better served Iraq. I don't know if it would apply to Egypt however. IN Iraq, the three major groups are generally geographically distinct. Anyone more familiar with Egypt's demographics... is this the care there? I really don't know...
 
Ask any Muslim if they accept Jesus as the Messiah of prophecy, nope...

I take it that you are not aware a core tenet of the Islamic faith is, in fact, that Jesus is the Messiah.
 
1. It is quite rare for a government to last even as long as 18 months. -- 50 governments since WWII is hardly stable...
2. The notion that the LDP dominated government is very misleading as there are many factions within the LDP that have been vying for power, resulting in a highly unstable system in the country.

Compared with the various factions within the Democratic party the Republican party of the US?

Overall up untill the last decade or so Japans government and its policies have been very stable with the MITI being a dominate force regarding the economy. In comparison to any other democracy I cant think of a country that has been more stable politically from 1950 to 2000
 
I take it that you are not aware a core tenet of the Islamic faith is, in fact, that Jesus is the Messiah.


To some folks? This is like saying well sure Jim Jones believed in Jesus too.
 
It works in some countries, but Italy and Japan, among others, are notably unstable and regulary change governments. Even England has a rather tricky coalition government right now that has the potential to cause problems there as the term goes on...

Take note of the superior socialism that England has been passing into law lately. :roll:
 
The situation so far is nothing like Iran.
The situation has so far not primarily been about religion, or anti-americanism.

As long as they play ball with oil, the Obama administration won't do anything too drastic.
 
The situation so far is nothing like Iran.
The situation has so far not primarily been about religion, or anti-americanism.

As long as they play ball with oil, the Obama administration won't do anything too drastic.

Egypt doesn't have much oil...their primary role in the oil trade is merely to keep the Suez Canal open and running. And there's no way that any Egyptian government would close it, because it would devastate their own economy.

But I agree, the situation does not appear to look anything like Iran. I'm a lot more optimistic that Egyptian democracy will be a good thing for the world, than I was a couple weeks ago.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom