Jose,
>From the cynical, cryptic and conspiratorial answers
you have given below, and your previously expressed
opinion that democracies are no different from
dictatorships in the areas of abuse and censorship,
your version of democracy is one that I do not
recognize and reject out of hand, especially the
curious notion that democratic governments do not
govern with the consent of the governed just because
elections are only held periodically.

I don't know where your obviously traumatic 
experience with conditions in democracies comes from
but I have lived in three large democracies, India,
the UK and the USA and recognize very little of what
you insinuate or allude to as constituting government
abuse and censorship, including your other peculiar
notion that certain government functions like running
post offices and requiring certain licences.

Ineffiency in certain instances?  Sure.  But abuse and
censorship?  Hardly, especially when compared to
conditions in a dictatorship, regardless of whether it
is right or left wing, where there are no
opportunities for any recourse.


Jose Colaco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Mario Goveia 1: 
< governments in a democracy, by definition, govern
with the consent of the governed.>
> 
>From Jose Colaco: 
Wrong!  Election - once in four/five years.
> 
 
> Mario Goveia  2: 
<I'm not sure what monopolies (government) you are
referring to, other than the post office>
> 
>From Jose Colaco:
> Well dear Sir, I am not about to do the reaearch for
> you. If you are not sure - go find out.
> 
> Mario Goveia  3: 
<In a democracy, big and small businesses can buy
advertising time, not news reporting time.>
> 
>From Jose Colaco: 
> I prefer Mr. Goveia to stay as informed as he
presently chooses to be.
> 
> Mario Goveia  4: 
<I have lived in three democracies, and I have
absolutely no idea what you are referring to here.>
> 
>From Jose Colaco: 
> Open your eyes and your mind. Good chance you will
eventually have an idea.
> 



Reply via email to