Danielle T
26th January 2012 |
Mark McKenna
I would like to know if you have any acutual information to post since you claim this website is false. Because otherwise I will not be able to finish my journalism homework.. =] |
Winston Jen
10th May 2011 |
Australia shouldn't be rated 6. We have legalised torture (laws against voluntary euthanasia). |
Shaun M.
15th December 2010 |
There is numerous ways to define democracy. To get a more informed answer I suggest reading: "What Democracy Is...And Is Not" by Philippe Schmitter and Terry Karl. It is a good starting point to form ones own opinion. |
R Potter
16th September 2010 |
It appears that ishta mohammad is another ill-informed, faith-based, illiterate who has been brainwashed into thinking the USA is a dictatorship.
Moreover, other sources confirm the findings of this list, namely Freedom House which uses a different methodology but surprisingly the outcomes are very similar.
|
BSGrace
12th February 2010 |
Normally, teachers want to testify the argument essay writing skills of some their students, nevertheless not all good students are able to write correctly just because of lack of knowledge and other issues. Thence, a essay writing service will aid to write the business term paper very fast. |
Lobato1 (Houston)
12th March 2009 |
For starters nowhere in Western Europe is anyone jailed for unpaid parking tickets.
Sad.
Best Regards
Lobato1 |
TJ Cargill (Illinois)
21st December 2007 |
Since the current government of the USA has ignored it's own constitution (The Fourth Amendment) which protects us from "unreasonable searches and seisures", How do they still rate a 6? Also, the people they have detained do not have the right of Habiu Corpus. This right was established by Magna Carta about 700 years ago. Prisoners who are listed as terror suspects have no status as a criminal or a POW, so the White House has decided that they have NO rights. Even though they have held hundreds of people in Gitmo, they have only been able to bring a few to trial.
Remember this is a Military court which requires less on the part of the prosecutors. Hundereds kept for years, and they can't let people speak to a lawer. Many have been released, eventually. These people were never formerly charged with any crime; they were kept in cages.
Also, when we have political meetings or conventions, "the authorities" deside that you can have your free speech in a "free speech zone" usually removed from the site of the intended protest. This violates our right to free speech as mentioned in the 1st Amendment. It also violates our right to assemble peacefully for redress of our grievences. |
Elvies Presly (New York)
12th December 2007 |
can you show me Tailand? and the statistics? |
nicholas lavertu (New hampshire)
8th October 2007 |
need to find a few questions about brazil if possible.
1> current political system of Brazil?
2> how did Brazils history effect the development of there political system?
3> does Brazil have stable institutions,or do they face internal/external pressures that could pose a danger to the present system?
4> hoes does Brazil meet the needs of its citizens, and is it responsive to their needs?
5> what challenges soes Brazil presently face(econmic,cultural,political,regional,& enviromental)an how well they are siuted,are they up to the task of facing them
i am doing a recearch paper for political science having very hard time finding the information that i need any help would be greatful |
Peter Carter (England)
12th June 2007 |
What gives Freedom House the right to classify according to political and civil rights. Surely the result will end up with a heavy bias towards the US definitions of political and civil rights... |
Will (Canada)
11th January 2007 |
I get uneasy when the term of 'imposing' democracy comes around. Perhaps you can cultivate it, but imposing democracy, especially through force, seems like a contradcition of terms.
But my question is- What exactly are the civil and political liberties being measured here? This is kind of confusing, I can't seem to find a good descrption of these stats and what they mean. |
Jan (Bulgaria)
9th July 2006 |
Democracy, in my view, is a subjective term. By the way, Ancient Greece was the cradle of democracy, but it wasn't a capitalist state... According to this ranking some countries turn out to be democratic states although some of them have a "white" European ruling elite and several million natives living in sheer poverty and illiteracy.
Quite another thing is democratic conscience: do you think that in a country which was a dictatorship for ages could exist real democracy just 15-20 years after the fall of that dictatorship? Maybe it would be possible after a generation or two...It is pseudodemocracy. |
Sumit Mitra
27th November 2005 |
It is important that you state the weights given to political and civil liberties respectively, and the reasons. How is China (130) better than Cuba (138)? Is it because China allows MNCs to exploit its cheap and abundant labor while Cuba exports only illegal immigrants to the US (other than cigar)? Neither country puts the law above everyone, however high, or allows citizens the right to vote the rulers out of power. |
Mark McKenna
27th November 2005 |
I notice that this information comes from only a single source, which, at first glance, contains a variety of nonfactual (i.e. opinion-oriented) statements. This is not a sufficiently representative selection of sources, and calls the outcome into question.
I also fail to understand how the rating system functions; an abstract value between 0 and 7 without even an example key to indicate what each level means.
Finally, I don't believe you can adequately rate a state's civil and/or political liberties in a single dimension, because there are too many conflicting and semi-independent axes; such as the selection of laws at work in the state, the ways in which they are enforced, de-facto qualities (such as social pressures which are not represented legally, the primary example of which would be racism), economic status and spread, and (most importantly) paradigmatic differences in worldview of the people in the nation.
I think it's irresponsible to put forth statistics which are not adequately sourced, as they appear to be authoratative without deeper analysis. |
Derek Gwali Lauta
31st October 2005 |
When a country is said to be an 'example of a poor democratic country' what does it essential means. What factors are taken into account to depiect as country as a poor democratic country? |
mark
30th September 2005 |
'land of the free' does not have to mean 'land of the free enterprise.' the USA got it wrong when it started putting economic freedoms above the good of the people. the united states should emulate the Nordic countries, in having a strong welfare system and limitations on corporations, whose only concerns are their returns to the shareholders. the united states has one of the highest rates of poverty and the highest rate of prisoners in the western world, and i think it can be attributed to a large extent to a 'lasseiz faire' style government. it make have worked in the roaring 20's, but i think it is now time for a change. |
Lobizón
15th September 2005 |
I agree with what Ossian has written above.
It is very dangerous and partisan to say that capitalism is a condition necessary for democracy.
The Second Spanish Republic, Chile under Salvador Allende, or even the Zapatistas Movement in Mexico, they are all examples that prove that democracy can exist, and even function better, under a non-capitalist economic system.
As a matter of fact, some people would argue that very extreme versions of capitalism, actually serve to weaken democracy, instead of strengthening it.
The US is a prime example of this: Democracy is weakened constantly by large monetary donations that corporations give to political parties. This practice is also known as political lobbying, and forces politicians to be condescending towards large businesses to keep getting this donations. |
Vijay
9th September 2005 |
I am surprised to see Pakistan in this list. It is currently ruled by a military leader, who got to power through a coup. |
ossian
4th August 2005 |
To Boris: Democracy is not totally dependent on the socioeconomic level of the country, although it has been concluded in many statistical studies that democracy in richer countries has better chances to survive. India is often mentioned as an example of a poor democratic country - but there are other examples as well.
To Vemuri: It is dangerous to argue that capitalism is a precondition of democracy or - atleast - one would need to define more clearly what is ment by the concepts 'capitalism' and 'democracy'. The Chinese rogue capitalism is hardly compatible with most understandings of democracy. |
Antonio
3rd July 2005 |
Boris I'd say it is possible, if rare, for a nation with a low standard of living to have a developped democract. That's judging by this and other things. Benin is listed fairly high but is quite poor and not that well educated. Mali is often listed as both one of the most democratic and impoverished Muslim nations. It is also a nation with high illiteracy. I heard of a democracy in Africa where many voted by marking next to the party symbol as large percentages couldn't read. Somewhat less poor is India which is the world's largest democracy if a flawed one.
How this happens I can't say. I would say cultural traditions may have some role. Many of the oldest democracies spring from lands where peoples had traditions of councils or assembly rulers. Like Switzerland, Iceland, the Isle of Mann, East Anglia, etc. There are Third World nations where the traditional culture was conciliar rather than autocratic. Also in some poor nations the educated class becomes enthusiastic supporters for democracy of some kind in least. That happened in India of the 1940s to a degree or in least I think so. |
Boris Ivanov
30th June 2005 |
Can low standard of living lead to a well-developed democracy? Is it possible to speak of 'democracy of the poor'? |
bob
27th June 2005 |
Making broad statements like "democracy cannot be imposed" is just bad writing. Democracy was, in fact, imposed on Japan in the post WWII period, and seems to be holding up fairly well. Whether it will fare well elsewhere is anyone's guess, but broad generalizations usually wind up being wrong. |
Shane (Australia)
22nd June 2005 |
It has always been an interesting observation to me that the nations which are democratic are the ones with high education levels. Knowledge is certainly power, and in an educated nation, knowldege empowers an educated population with the ability to question it's goverment's policies. Is it the people who ensure democracy in educated nations? I think so. |
pebble
16th June 2005 |
Henry, just take out the unfortunate phrase "by foreign intervention" and then read a comprehensive history of Afghanistan. Not that early to comment, sadly. |
Ishta Mohammed
14th June 2005 |
Is the US really a democracy? And all this time I thought it was a Dictatorship! |
Ishta Mohammed
14th June 2005 |
Is the US really a democracy? And all this time I thought it was a Dictatorship! |
Felix the French guy in our story
13th June 2005 |
Since when is the US a democracy? I always thought George Bush was a dictator! |
henry
4th June 2005 |
In response to Suchita Vemuri - "while all attempts to impose democracy in Afghanistan by foreign intervention have patently failed." Really? It's a bit early for that bit of editorializing, isn't it? |
Leeha Warfeild
16th February 2005 |
How many countries in the world are democracies? |
Feeds |
Contact