Even after 41 years in power, the
Libyan dictator believes he can weather the storm. Indeed Libya is far away from democracy. Nonetheless what has been the dividend of democracy for nations who have bought the tenets of democracy hook line and sinker. Demonstration of decadence or what?
52 comments:
when looking at Libya and other countries who have democracy (especially the developing ones), in my personal opinion; the difference is not much. i would say the major difference is that just one person has bin leading the country for 41 years.
the benefit of democracy in most countries is the freedom of speech, but most times when the government wants to implement law they do it without seeking the consent of an ordinary citizen. even though they claim it is done to benefit the masses.
secondly what is the use of democracy if the economy is stagnant or getting worse? what is democracy when the citizens can not benefit from it?
I feel he will not be able to weather the storm. It was reported yesterday by Libyan authorities that a NATO airstrike killed one of longtime strongman Moammar Gadhafi's sons and three of his grandchildren. If he does not wet it down soon, he will regret everything he thought he was fighting for. He seems to be very stubborn on am sure he is going to have revenge on the people or body responsible.
Libya is in absolute dictatorship under the control of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi since Sept. 1969 through a coup. Although various committees and congresses are in place which include the parliamentary General People's Congress but there are no elections and no political parties.
The state derives its ideology from Qaddafi's Green Book, a collection of his sayings and philosophies. To the religious aspect of Libya’s culture I researched that Qaddafi controls the country's mosques and Islamic institutions such as Islamic schools. Christians, Hindus, Baha'is and Buddhists, in Libya, are allowed to practice their faith unless the government suspects the practice to be politically motivated. In the economy of Libya most of the economy is nationalized.
It is almost a culture that all men and women who reach 18 theoretically are to be conscripted in the Libyan military. In practice, however, many men aren't educated enough to participate, and many women simply don't. Globalsecurity.com estimates that 45,000 soldiers serve in the Libyan army, including 25,000 draftees, and 25,000 in the Libyan air force. Until a $400 million arms deal with France in 2007, the military has been mostly furnished by the former Soviet Union.
In terms of human right and the media system in Libya, there is no freedom of association or freedom of expression, and no free press, although the government only occasionally blocks web sites critical of the regime, which are numerous.
Indeed this people need change and help as soon as possible. I really hope things get better for them. Democracy is important because it gives the right to the people to express their views or opinions. In democracy people are free, there is freedom. I consider a quality or good democracy to be one presenting a stable institutional structure that realizes the liberty and equality of citizens through the legitimate and correct functioning of its institutions and mechanisms.
i want us to understand what democracy is? A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives....The people decide who will represent them in parliament, and who will head the government at the national and local levels. They do so by choosing between competing parties in regular, free and fair elections....ther should be a costitution that rules not khadaffi's Green Book....
even if NATO kills all his family someone like khadaffi ld not give'p bcoz his ideology is really tight fisted. may be he should ve killed like OBL...then peace would reign then the Libyan can enjoy the benefits of true democracy!!
Rachael, if he should die today, who told you he does not have followers? because osama is dead does not mean terrorism is over. the major problem is even the fact that Libya has no formal constitution. The country's political system is theoretically based on the political philosophy in Muammar al-Gaddafi's "Green Book", which combines socialist and Islamic theories and rejects parliamentary democracy and political parties. In reality, Gadhafi exercises near total control over the government. in short, there is no freedom of information instead what is in Libya is dictatorship form of Government. nevertheless, other countries are not so democratic but the only difference with them and Libya as Sophea said is the fact that Gadhafi has ruled for 41 years.
08BE07351
I must say that Libya is not a democratic state based of the following facts:
There is no freedom of association or freedom of expression, and no free press and the government occasionally blocks web sites critical of the regime, which are numerous.
Libya is an absolute dictatorship under the control of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi since Sept. 1969. Various committees and congresses are in place, including the parliamentary General People's Congress. But there are no elections and no political parties, and the state derives its ideology from Qaddafi's Green Book, a collection of his sayings and philosophies loosely based on an amalgam of socialism, economics, Islamic law and Qaddafi's idea of socio-anthropology which is published from time to time.
Since 1969 the domestic economy of Libya has reflected the economic philosophy of the country’s leader, Muammar al-Qaddafi. In 1978 the second volume of Qaddafi’s guiding treatise, The Green Book, was published. In it he declared opposition to private retail trade, wages, and rent all of which he deemed forms of exploitation. Workers were required to participate in self-management committees, and companies were forced to distribute a set percentage of profits to their workers. Several years later, all individual bank accounts were seized in an effort to ensure equal assets for all Libyans.
Oil and gas account for 95 percent of Libyan export revenue, 75 percent of its government revenue and 30 percent of the country's total economic output. Agriculture accounts for 18 percent of Libya's economy, but the country imports most of its food.
The government nationalized most economic activities and discouraged foreign investment in all fields except the hydrocarbon (petroleum and natural gas) sector. These economic upheavals disrupted the development of domestic trade and industry. During the 1990s the government began to allow privately owned retail shops, and it authorized the privatization of some state-owned industries. It also allowed foreign investment. The government has been generous and egalitarian in the distribution of its oil revenues, however, resulting in dramatic improvements in the education, health, and housing of virtually all Libyans.
In 1992 the United Nations (UN) imposed economic sanctions on Libya in response to its support of international terrorism. Those sanctions were lifted in 1999, opening the way for foreign investment. In 2004 the United States lifted its economic sanctions, and U.S. companies began seeking investment opportunities in Libya.
justina 08be0732 says what if he was caught and was really tortured, do you think other would want to follow. it is important that we know all days for the thief, one day for the owner. and when the owner gets this, the thief is gone. i belive that what libya rili need right now is democracy. the need to go and amend their constitution. no one should be allowed to rule for more than 4 years or else their situation would be worse than befor
Well, since the southern countries in general have democracy at the tip of their hands, nevertheless, i have discovered that not all southern nations have access to democracy, and libya is one very good example. In my research, libya gained its independence in 1951 in which the system of MONARCHY took over...a monarch is a superior leader who passes the rulership down to his descendants, e.g, a king...this went on till al-Quaddafi seized power. He was at that time a young army officer...in the military...which explains further that libya has been under a military dictatorship rule for about 41 years now.Before Quaddafi took over in 1969, libya practiced monarchy with a mix of socialism...then, the dictator changed the whole of libya with his absolute power and authority...he has been ruling libya by force ever since...and there was a time in Punch newspaper when the libyans tried to protest against him...saying they do not want his rulership anymore, he organized his army and started bombing libya, with missiles...and he made a statement saying he would remain on seat till the end of his life.So,in my own opinion, libya has never practiced democracy all because of the military dictatorship that rules the nation.
For the other nations that practice democracy, like Nigeria, the mix of socialism and capitalism, and not the demonstration of decadence...is what has kept them going in their system of government. Even though libya has some traces of socialism before, the independent monarchy they had plus the military dictatorship has denied the act of democracy in libya.
The Libyan government is meant to be practicing democracy but their leader, Ghadafi has ruled for 41 years which is not meant to be because a typical democratic leader is meant to rule for maximum: 8years… so Libya no longer practices democracy. Well looking at it critically, there’s not much difference between Libyan government and other democratic nations because democracy is meant to be free….freedom of speech or information and the people are meant to have a say but here we don’t practice all that and the government doesn’t even carry its people along. We just use the name “democracy” but we don’t act it……infact to me democracy encourages evil acts, corruption and other immoral acts. The democracy we practice now is not by the people and for the people anymore it is by the leaders and for the leaders….the rate at which rigging is been made a “normal thing” in election is enormous. 08BE07336
What is democracy? it seems to me that the definition of democracy is far different from what is being practiced in the country Libya, an oil-rich nation in North Africa, spent more than 40 years under the firm, if erratic, leadership of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi Libyais said to have being practicing democracy of which for me it is the opposite due to the fact there is no freedom of information and expression of the citizens of that country and secondly the meaning of democracy is the form of government in which all the citizens have equal right to make an expression, the practice of democracy in Libya and in other countries are different because the freedom of citizens of Libya are actually tired down the decision coming from the government even though other countries are not completely practicing democracy Libya is far from it, how sure are we that death of Qaddafi will bring an end to terrorism in Libya?
what i think about this issue of democracy is that, as it has disadvantage it has disadvantage, one thing is emminent u cant give someone having ulcer paracetamol and except it to go, it will end up adding to the problem, until we find a system that works for us, we are only deceiving ourselves, looking at the case of Lybia, i hope their case doesnt end up like that of isreal soliciting for king when they had priest then. as for Gadafi, its time to take a bow and leave the stage of leadership. democracy is good, but one question still remains is it suitable for us as southern nations is that what works for us?
Jane Ade-Unuigbe 08BE07295
Democracy is defined as a government chosen by the people, in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. it signifies political or social equality of rights and privileges.
Libya is obviously not in this state, and to even think that they are close to it is quite absurd. After being ruled authoritatively for 41 years by the same man, the same rules, and the same doctrines, it is possible that the people of Libya do not even know how to express freedom. they might have lost all semblance of their rights. We do not blame them.
The Libyan dictator can however NOT storm the weather, because in a world that is fast changing with new adaptations been brought out, it is either one changes or goes under. He has refused to change, and therefore he will have to go under, because once you don't move with change, you become extinct.
Libya is not a democratic state, and democracy is a doctrine that is fast gaining popularity. With their lack of freedom in the press, voting, and even in living, it is quite obvious that they are far from Democracy, and this will not be allowed by neighboring countries that are trying to reach a global nation, system and village together. One authoritative and dogmatic leader cannot be allowed to hold us back. He cannot weather the storm.
For the other nations that have accepted the doctrines of democracy hook,line, and sinker, it is not a demonstration of decadence because democracy is a step forward in the right direction of our freedom, and it is a much superior way of life that the authoritarian regime. Therefore it should even be more widely accepted and encouraged, instead of being pushed down, because it is not a show of decadence.
08BE07305 AKINWUMI ADJUA
Just this morning I woke up with a limited quite ignorant view of democracy well this question and an argument with my brother changed it all.
The term democracy in its broadest sense represents a government chosen by the people made up of the people and is for the people’s interest. Libya has never been a democratic state. Qaddafi as a young 27 year old military official overthrew the Libyan monarchy in the country’s first and only coup. After 42 years of terror his days are now numbered.
Relating to the question I must ask what is in democracy? what is it about democracy that thousands of Middle easterners are willing to die for? What has made them so disillusioned with their present form of government (socialism)? What are the dividends of the freedom they are fighting for? What makes democracy better than socialism or communism? If we must use countries, what makes the free but decadent USA better than the restricted but moral Saudi Arabia? In summary why democracy?
The argument against or for democracy is a question of who should be given the highest priority in government; the people or the state?
To the socialist, the state is made up of the ideologies and beliefs that define the people. To this reason the interest of the state is always placed before the people. The state is more than the people that inhabit it. Just look at the happenings in Libya where Qaddafi is ruthlessly bombing his people to protect a set of ideas. His concept of Libya transcends beyond the people, his belief in creating an anti western state, a truly Islamic republic takes precedence. The death of his people to him is a causality he can live with just to protect that dream of utopian Libya. The problem here lies the fact that he needs the people he is killing to push forward his beliefs. According to the socialist democracy is selfish and corrupt. Why give the ignorant (the masses) the power to rule?
Democracy is the exact opposite, the state here is the people, the people is the state. Democracy believes in individuality, while the socialist would kill for the bigger picture the democratic believes in the right to life. It believes in giving each individual the right to decide his/her fate. And I think this is majorly what the middle easterners are fighting for. To highlight on only the decadence of democratic states like the USA is to disregard other vital proponents of democracy.
the people of libya first of all need all the prayer they can get, having the same person rule your land for over 40 years means that there might be something else into the matter. for me, i would say that the people of libya should choose what works for them because at the end of the day, it will be them that would suffer whatever consequences come out of their action. they might think they are practising democracy but i can asure them that they are not. left to me its al about the authority that is transfered from Gadafi to the people. i would say that if they think that its cemocratic rule that they are running, then the word would surely have lost its meaning.
Folasade Ola (08BE07343)
Abraham Lincoln describes democracy as government OF the people, FOR the people and BY the people and if most people weren't busying themselves with the biased information CNN was feeding the world, you would realize that MAJORITY of Libyans are in actual fact not complaining.
Now, note that Ghadafi bombed a group of rebels. Rebels that had links with the United Nations which is basically the united states. And i'm sure you're wondering why the UN wud be interested in Libya especially. Well, there is oil in Libya and the United States wants a part of it and since Ghadafi is being resistant, they decided to turn a small group of people against the government. Have you ever thought of the fact that he ruled for the first decade, then the second, third and fourth and nobody said anything? Do you think they didnt think he had overstayed his rulership?
The people of Libya are satisfied with his rulership, people are just blowing the rebels protests out of proportion.
That being said, i still believe its still a democratic nation. As long a sits FOR the people, OF the people and BY the people.
Until a reasonable mass of Libyans come out to protest, then i believe they are satisfied...
p.s you lot should watch Al Jazeera when following up on this story. they give more objective reports
08BE07305 AKINWUMI ADJUA
uhm Sade i totali disagree with you.
The people of Libya were never always pro Ghadafi jus becos der is more media attention now doesnt mean they have been quiet all along. Yes the USA is only involved for their selfish reasons but still if something good is to come out of their selfishness why should we complain. Plus amassing national wealth while supposedly spearheading socialism is one of the factors that made Ghadafi fall out wit his people.
and ps Libya is not practicing a government FOR and BY the people as you state he is a self instated war hero who is refusing to go....
ADELEKE AYOOLUWA(08BE07290)
(Lakoff, 1996, p.32) says
Democracy is a process of self-government in which individuals operate upon their environment directly and indirectly- directly as they make decisions for themselves, pursue careers, enter into relationships with others, and otherwise live their lives and indirectly through political representatives accountable for them. The system of government makes possible centralized decision making and rule-setting in matters that affect all citizens (the responsibility that accompanies all freedoms), and decentralized decision making and rule-setting in those best addressed on the local level. It is, in short, a social and political system characterized by a high degree of personal liberty and equally high degree of political liberty, manifested in regular and free competitive elections, protected by a legal system based upon a constitution, and often articulated by means of federalism. the tenets of democracy is not evident in Libya, also (Webster, 1991) agrees The Republic is a government in which the supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to the law.
Libya is operating a one man show which is nothing near democracy. Tolerance is one of the tenets of democracy however Gaadafi ids not tolerating any one as far as he is concerned it is a do or die affair
BUZUGBE NKEM (08BE07315)
what is democracy?
Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. democracy has been working in develop world but not in africa so i really think libyan government has been stable without democracy
democracy has never work perfectly well in africa
the dictator think he deserves to be ruler due to the fact of where and how he has been ruling the country well their future depends on their hands but it is not going to be easy to OVERTHROW GADAFFI. it will takeGod's grace for them to overthrow him and he is very adamant it is better for him to leave now before he loses everything he had hoped for.
what is democracy?
Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. democracy has been working in develop world but not in africa so i really think libyan government has been stable without democracy
democracy has never work perfectly well in africa
the dictator think he deserves to be ruler due to the fact of where and how he has been ruling the country well their future depends on their hands but it is not going to be easy to OVERTHROW GADAFFI. it will takeGod's grace for them to overthrow him and he is very adamant it is better for him to leave now before he loses everything he had hoped for. BUZUGBE NKEM 08BE07315
DEMOCRACY, LIKE ALL OTHER CONCEPTAS WE RAVE ABOUT, IS QUANTIFIABLE,RELATIVE. i TOTALLY AGREE WITH DEDE WHEN SHE SAYS THAT IT IS POSSIBLE THESE PEOPLE DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT FREEDOM IS ANYMORE. EVEN IN NIGERIA A "DEMOCRATIC" STATE, JUST HOW MUCH FREEDOM DOES THE PRESS HAVE? WHAT THEN ARE THE DIVIDENDS OF DEMOCRACY? THE FACT THAT EVEN WE ARE NOT AS FREE AS WE SHOULD BE DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE CANNOT BE AN IMPROVEMENT.it would be foolhardy to say like that boy that was defending abacha during our easter class with the VC that they should remain that way since democracy does not pay that much anyways. however it would be a step by step journey to fufillment for Libya, and one which would start with Gadhaffi's total removal. And NO, he cannot waether tis storm. Power corrupts, and Absolute power corrupts absolutely, he is to strongly set in his autocratic reign to bend succesfully with the changing times,he will surely break.He knows no other way to rule than as a dictator and the people are tired of just that. Ireti oluwagbemi 08be07346
my opinion about this issue of democracy, its a government that is elected by the people, its for the people, democracy is suppose to create orderliness in a nation, lets look at it critically, everybody cannot be leading everybody, so people are chosen to represent this many people, they at any time should be able to tell the elect what they want and the elect do accordingly. in its practical sense, this does not apply the reverse is the case. what this southern nation really need is a government formulated by them, for them and to them. as for lybia, i think gadafi, tried, but the crux of the matter is that the whole world is against you all he needs to do is to surrender, instead of behaving like pharoah in the bible, been stiffnecked.
08BE07309
Democracy at present and its dividends are relative from country to country and since for as long as we have known no country has practiced “pure democracy” I will not call it a demonstration of decadence. And relating this argument to the system of government in Libya; realizing the fact that Libya has never practiced a democratic system of government (at least in a very long while). In conclusion no nation that is said to be practicing democracy has degenerated to the state Libya has in terms of political government. Therefore Libya is the nation that there is a demonstration of decadence and other nations practicing democracy are fairly decent.
Libya is governed as a jamahiriya (“state of the masses”) under a constitution adopted in 1977. The tenet behind this political arrangement is the Third Universal Theory, expounded by Muammar al-Qaddafi in his three-volume tract, The Green Book. This theory, which exhibits influences from socialism, Islamic political theory, and Libyan tribal practice, was designed as an alternative to both capitalist liberalism and communism.
In practice, however, he retains ultimate power. With various crimes against humanity, cruelty, terrorism, etc by just one man; Libya is definitely practicing an authoritarian system of government and at the helm is Muammar al-Qaddafi.
Comparing the methods used by Qaddafi and those in USA or Iraq; I think it Libya there is the demonstration of decadence and USA and Iraq to an extent demonstrate a fair level of decency.
08be07339
democracy is all freedom. i agree with Rafiat and Yohanna on their own opinion. what i just have to say is that if Ghadafi doesn't surrender, he he will end up just like Pharaoah- in the 'Red Sea'. he should listen to what his people are saying and surrender or else he is likely to kick the bucket soon. as for libya, i will say that there is nothing like democracy coz the people's opinions or actions have not been strong enough to remove Ghadafi from seat. too bad
Before we go ahead of ourselves lets note that the concept of democracy in itself mandates that all citizens have EQUAL say in the decisions affecting their lives, that means that not only do they get to choose their leaders but also hold them accountable for their policies and conduct in office, that being said can Gaddafi weather the storm, i honestly believe he can while hoping the United nations and other forces would step up and take decisive actions to save Libya but with the indecisive nature of Obama's administration, the confused state of EU and the seeming impotence of NATO, Gaddafi has continued to grow wings claiming just recently that he would die a martyr(he needs to check out the meaning of that word). But that being said what really is the gain of democratic countries in accepting democracy and all of its tenets(capitalism, libertarian/free press), what is the gain of our very own Nigeria yes Gaddafi is killing his own people so terribly, the entire world is crying fowl but if we say the people are in charge of the state and not the government then what is our justification for having a decadent democracy, a democracy of great ineptitude in leadership a democracy where what 360 members of the house of reps eat as breakfast can feed my entire village!it really is a democracy of decadence and while i agree that at least democratic nations are not subjected to the terrorism of socialist and communist states, i fail to see how that translates into freedom for us, after all so many Arabic gulf nations are far more economically buoyant that so called democratic countries, based on the pre given definition of democracy we don't have much of a say in the affairs of our nation so all in all the million dollar question is how much better are we that these socialist states, although the fact that Gaddafi has not yet been removed says much for the strong hold he has on that country,the people are really tired of his autocracy but i think getting tired isn't solving the problem so i suggest that they should get shoes (the highest form of insult in the Arab community)and throw them,neigh stone them at him.
A very big yes to answer that question. We SEE decadence in the countries that adopt democracy hook, line and sinker. For example, advertising has reduced women from human beings to mere symbols of sexuality, just to sell a product, as if a woman’s sexuality depicts the totality of her existence. People use half-clad women to advertise cars! As a result, traditional respect for morality, virginity and dignity in womanhood has greatly declined. Men have bought into that ideology that women are to be rated based on their sexuality and they therefore use women to gratify such.
Nevertheless, the current moral decadence in the world today is more as a result of the degeneration of “the human being” than political systems. I don’t mean to sound religious but humanity’s disregard for God opened the way for the evil one to do his thing. And we all know that “the thief comes only to steal, to kill and to destroy.” As long as men don’t put God in His rightful place as King, things will worsen.
No political system encourages decadence more than the others. Freedom of information which democracy upholds only makes the deplorable state of mankind less hidden. what is being practiced in Libya is as far from democracy as night is far from day. 08BE07289
i think we are getting the fundamentals wrong if we think of 'freedom' when we think of 'democracy.' democracy and freedom are totally different concepts. democracy is a government of the people, for the people by the people. what is the relationship between that and 'freedom'? democracy essentially advocates fairness, equal representation and consideration of the needs of the majority. if every human being is free, there will be anarchy. therefore if democracy brings 'freedom', it will be a bad thing then for the human race in the long run. democracy is ABOUT fairness and consideration of the people rather than the individual, AND NOT ABOUT FREEDOM.
anthonia, i agree with you that the people of Libya should practice whichever system of government will work for them- favor the people and bring development. i don't think any of us has the right to determine what this system should be.
Democracy!Democracy! what exactly do you guys want to define as democracy because if we are to look at the definition very well, it is a form of government that allows the people to make decision and chose their own leader but what do we see here, a president has ruled for 41years and yet refuses to leave and instead of respecting the wishes of the people and leave he decides to apply violence,in my own opinion there is nothing known as democracy in libya, it is purely dictatorship.....
EMMABETH 08BE07320
Libya, is obviously not practising a democratic system. first the definition,a democratic system is a government for the people, of the people and by the people. and for heavens sake Libya has not lived up to this. Gadafi has ruled his people for 41 years with no plans of stepping down and instead he decides to use force and some form of cohesion. what form of democracy is this? Gadifi's type. lol.
Deola 08BE07310
Democracy is simply defined by government of the people for the people and by the people.
Libya uses the revolutionary system of government. This system has being on since 1969 which by the end of this year would have being running for 42 years. From our previous class, we found out that a revolutionary government is not a permanent government.
Another appalling fact is that it has being the same government ruling all these years.
We should also note that the revolutionary leadership is not elected and cannot be voted out of office and as such are in power by virtue of their involvement in the revolution. The revolutionary sector dictates the decision-making processes.
one may argue that in Libya there are committees put in place but it is important to note that there are no elections, political parties and the state derives its ideology from Qaddafi's Green Book, a collection of his sayings and philosophies loosely based on an amalgam of socialism, economics, Islamic law and Qaddafi's idea of socio-anthropology (quote: "As the man does not get pregnant, he is not liable to the feebleness which woman, being female, suffers"). And also all the people that occupy the committee position are from the revolutionary government.
The major dividends of democracy are power and freedom of expression but we can comfortably say that Libya and Nigeria have not gotten their dividend of democracy. As a matter of fact Libya should not be referred to as a democratic state, it is absolute dictatorship. And for Nigeria it is said to be a demonstration of decadence while some other countries of the west to an extent have had a potion of the dividend of democracy
For me, libya is a democratic practising nation only on paper nad not in actions. why would one say democracy and still hoard power for over forty years when it is not a monarch system of government. may I also point out that our own country Nigeria is only slightly different in that we still have figureheads in power and "godfathers" in the background carry out their desired actions through those they have placed in power. how different are they from Gadhafi who openly rules the nation?
Libya is a decadence and not fit to be called to be called a democratic state. Democracy is government of the people,by the people and for the people. The state of a Libya is the government of Gadhafi and not the people. No freedom of speech,life,property and other fundamental human rights. It is a state of absolute authoritarian and dictatorship.
Ajiboye taiwo_O8beo7300
08BE07337- I totally agree with Lyniee Adjua Akinwunmi. There is no reason whatsoever to justify Ghadafi's action, I mean, he has done and undone. Looking at the CNN update "Gunners pound rebels, embassies sacked after Gadhafi's son said killed". Ghadafi is obviously intoxicated with power, as the old saying goes- "Power corrupts, absolutely power corrupts". He has wielded so much power for too long.
Comparing the methods used by Ghadafi and those in USA, I think in Libya there is the demonstration of decadence and USA to an extent demonstrate a fair level of decency.
Democracy... freedom implied although it has its own limits, practised in countries like Europe, America and the US. well, i really think Libya's challenge is the inability of the citizens to see clearly. can't someone just kill him secretely and risk his/her life? that's really the true spirit of citizenship.
although democracy has paved way for capitalism making the rich richer and the poor poorer thus promoting a divided society, there is still a sort of political bouyancy. there's hardly any political rift in such countries, that to me is their major dividend from democracy.
there is decadence on the part of libyans, they need to find out what to do themselves. they cannot keep involving the US in all their fights and violence.
i am so proud of Nigerians... i remember when Abacha was killed. it didn't take an army, it only took two women. Libyans, please take a cue from that and do not let Gadhafi become a demi-god to you!!!!!!that's my candid opinion, ma.
Libya is not a democratic nation, it never was, and it will never be until our dear Gaddafi steps down. I mean the country is void of dialogue, tolerance, co-operation, national cohesiveness and the active participation of all citizens and until all these is achieved, the nation cannot be a democratic nation.
As for the dividends of the tenets of democracy for nations practicing democracy, they are so evident. Such nations that have bought the tenets of democracy are mostly more developed that nations that have not. The dividends of democracy is more of good than of evil. its gives more freedom to the people of a nation than any other form of government. OSOTA BUKUNMI 08BE07348
Akinnawo Taiwo 08BE07303
Personally, I feel Gadaffi would weather the storm. He practically has control over Libya and has shown nonchalance in the danger he is putting his people into. However it seems to me like the people are not even crying out because I read in the papers this morning of them protesting on the death of his son.
The people of Libya to the best of my knowledge have a right to decide who they want and how long he will stay, however they are practising an autocratic/monarch rule with a democratic constitution...they should decide which they want to follow. However sending the Libya ambassador in the UK, the recent development due to the bombing of the embassy is not going to help matters.
Finally, In decadence I will say Yes that has been the dividend.
So far, I am impressed by your comments on Libya. Keep it up.
08BE07302
According yo Abraham lincoln democaracy is government of the people for the people and by the people, as regards Libya, Libya it can be said to democratic on paper, but practically it is not democratic.
These days, democracy is not really practiced; what we see is corruption.
The Libyan dictator like you rightly described him, has really done very well to bottle the hopes of the Libyan people for a better tomorrow. But one real fact has to come into limelight here; what good percentage of the world knew about the state of decadence in Libya before now? Very few percentage indeed. Regarding present circumstances and media reports, it is true that Libya may indeed be far from democracy; yet believable is the fact that they are yet close to it. A good number of countries in the world have soared in democracy for some donkey years and yet have had nothing to show off for it. Paul Biya of Cameroon has ruled since 1982. Do we also call this democracy? Many countries who have democracy belting them still live in violence and cloned dictatorship: Little wonder I do have a deep conviction that Libya would be off the hook once Gadaffi is let into the water to drown.
Amaka Udeagha you hinted that Gaddafi could have followers or otherwise faithfuls who could continue from where he stopped. Suffice me to state here that you are not so right. He may have the 'Green Book', but never forget that laws like those therein the 'Green Book' die once the lawmaker dies. 'The death of a bad head brings life to the body'.
Libya are sure candidates for democracy, the people are fighting for this and democracy they will get in full proportion.
I do not see Gaddafi's long reign as an issue here, but rather the future of the government, the people. Few days ago, I watched the mouthy Donald Trump boldly where he publicly scorned Obama for not doing enough to free Libya, considering their wealth of oil. The question now is; what happens to Libya when Gaddafi leaves; Is democracy of utmost importance to them?
IZUAKOR 08BE07325
the state of governance in Libya is quite a confusing one i must say considering that the government body believe it is only president Gaddafi who can stay in power to weather a Somalia- or Iraq-style power vacuum.
That apart, Libya I agree is only practicing democracy on paper. According to the tenets of democracy
"Democracy is a social and political system characterized by a high degree of personal liberty and equally high degree of political liberty, manifested in regular and free competitive elections, protected by a legal system based upon a constitution, and often articulated by means of federalism." (Lakoff, 1996, p.32)
The above is a detailed definition of democracy of which in short democracy is FREEDOM. Libyans are not free is an understatement, they are so caged to the extent they want to break away and who can blame them.
in conclusion, I think it’s important to look at the Libyan case from another angle where their main issue just might not be their practical system of governance, like the fact that Gaddafi is still in office to prevent the Libyan case to be like that of Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan.
I was listening to BBC radio some time ago, and there was a man who said Ghaddafi came into power when he was just eight years old. the man is now 49, and Ghaddafi is the only ruler he has known...this is the truth for many Libyans, and it is a bit scary to know that the only leadership these people have known is that of a tyrant. Ghaddafi is a power-crazed dictator, and it is laughable for anyone to say that Libya is practising democracy. If Nigeria claims she is practising democracy and we are still like this, I think Libya should hide their faces and not say it out loud...Maybe they will get there someday (i honestly hope they do), but for now, it is an AUTOCRATIC government
What is a democracy? The most popular definition of a democracy (which is parroted by primary school pupils) is a government of the people by the people and for the people.
Who in his/her right mind will call Libya a democratic state? It is operated by one man, Gadhafi for and of the benefit of one man, Gadhafi. How then can we describe this as a democracy?
It is important, I think to note here that when the government is run for the benefit of the people be it a liberal democracy or a progressive military rule, such government legitimizes itseld in the eye of the people. Not only is Gadhafi's Libya not a democracy, it is not a legitimate government in the eye of the average Libyan.
It is also interesting to note that when reffering to Libya most people say "Gadhafi's Libya" If Libya is one man's property how is that democratic?
Okelue laura 08be07341,, libya is certainly not a democratic country. How can a president stay in his position for soo long. On channels yesterday, the US said they wont cease bombings until Ghadafi stops attacking rebels. The world is not in support of lybias government. Personally, i feel the leader should be replaced in order to stop loss of lives in libya. I say again, there is no democracy, powerful nations like the US should help fight this ill.
Another shocker is that according to Daily sun on tuesday,NATO has refused to respond to CNNs inquiry. What are they hiding? Is that democracry?
Libya is not practicing a democratic syetem of govenrment because Gaddafi came in as a millatary president where power was in a unitary form. In practice however, Gaddafi retains ultimate power. A democratic state should share power among all levels, but when we have power coming from one source, then dat is no longer democracy. Libya needs help, and that is what NATO has come to give, its high time libyans protested and engage in a revolutionary media to bring about this change
i have posted somthing before but i wonder why its not showing. i said libya is not a democrate state. because how can a man rule a country for his own selfish interest and to the dertriment of the people of the nation. Libya's political system is in theory based on the political philosophy in Gadhafi's Green Book, which combines socialist and Islamic theories and rejects parliamentary democracy and political parties. In reality, Gadhafi exercises near total control over major government decisions. For the first 7 years following the revolution, the Revolutionary Command Council, which included Colonel Gadhafi and 12 fellow army officers, began a complete overhaul of Libya's political system, society and economy. In 1973, Gadhafi announced the start of a "cultural revolution" in schools, businesses, industries, and public institutions to oversee administration of those organizations in the public interest. On March 2, 1977, Gadhafi convened a General People's Congress (GPC) to proclaim the establishment of "people's power," change the country's name to the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, and to vest, theoretically, primary authority in the GPC.
Are we actually calling the political system a democracy? from a number of articles that i have read, i have gathered that Libya is not running a democracy but a full time military dictatorship and tyranny. Libyans are glamoring for a democratic government where their views would be heard and where another person should be given a chance to run the presidency. and that is one of the reasons for the unrest right now in the Arabian Peninsula, of course amidst other politically intricacies.
just this morning, a recent posting on Libyan says;The Libyan rebels have laid out a framework for their transition to democracy with the promise of free and fair elections and a referendum on a constitution. The Transitional National Council, the de facto government of the rebel-held east end of the country, met with officials from 22 countries in Rome to set up an aid fund to keep the rebels and civilians armed and fed as their war with forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi rages into its third month. The new government plans to hold municipal elections overseen by the United Nations to prepare for a national election at an undisclosed date. The public will also get to vote on a constitution, which is being drafted now, before heading to the polls to select a new national government.
from this recent posting, we see that Libyans are relentless over their cry and demand for a democratic government, although this would not be an easy transition given that the tyrant Gadhafi has sworn to rather die on the thrown instead of stepping down. but with the recent killing of his son and three grand sons, lets see how far he can go with it.
libya is soo far away from democracy from my opinion, because the fact that one human being (not even a god) can rule the country for close to 42 years goes to show how selfish and dumb he is, he is vain for the fact that he prefers to die than to step down, democracy is achieved when the government and the people are in sync which makes it possible for full participation on both ends, the moment one of the 2 key items are not enjoying the participation it no longer becomes democracy. as far as im concerned democracy is very far from this people the fact that one nuisance can decide to rule for 42 years, what then stops another one from entering power and doing 50 years if not more. its sad to say but if Libyans want democracy they will have to fight their way through, because i dont see it coming any time soon
Personally I think democracy is an illusion, it is simply unattainable. If you dig deep into the happenings in our world today, especially in the government sector you would see that this is true. There is simply no difference between what is happening in Libya and what is happening in some democratic states, take Nigeria for example. The people in power do whatever they want to do. They steal, kill, lie and do whatever. Politics is now a ver dirty game. They promise the world and never do a thing t help the masses adn when the masses complain they are fed with more lies and if they take action they are either locked up or killed. Why would we now say there is "DEMOCRACY" when we do not have a say in the affairs of our own country. The people in power elect who they feel should be in power and we cannot do anything about it.
MYra-08be07331
In my opinion, the state of LIbya is far from democracy and is purely decadent.
Muammar Gaddafi’s cruel dictatorship in Libya should be brought to an end and his political demise is long overdue.
There could be more horror for the people of Libya after witnessing reports overnight of a massacre in Tripoli.
The Gaddafi regime is a very cruel dictatorship and has a history of involvement in acts of terror. Its time is up.
The dictator should be removed and yes his replacement could be a lot more worse than what the Libyans have now.
It's a volatile situation all over the mid east and I don't think anyone has a clue as to what to do about it realistically.
There are answers but there is no way in God's blue jewel of a planet that the Muslims and Arabians are going to listen to the lessons of God Incarnate. All the answers are in the teachings of Jesus but like I said, they won't listen to a Jewish Rabbi (Jesus of Nazareth) and those who do? .... Well there just aren't enough of them to stem the tide of horrors running rampant across the lands of Arabian nations.
Post a Comment