In a message dated 3/6/2007 4:19:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, andrew.cady@gmail.com writes:
Please remember that (if we are to believe the dialogue) Socrates could have fled, but chose to drink the hemlock out of respect for the authority of Athenian government. Even where the state murders to censor critics, its dictates are not to be resisted. That is the mentality of Plato.
I was citing political science. Machiavelli, viewed in Italy as their George Washington for his republican values, also said the people decide better about their rulers than princes when they're properly informed in _The Discourses_. Moreover, what about my citation of the _Federalist Papers_, which also criticizes pure democracy?
The United States still does not directly elect its president, though I believe there's been improvement with the Electoral College since the Y2K election. However, we didn't even directly elect our senators till the 20th century. Democracy and freedom are essentially one and the same, but as Madison also said, we must control the effects of liberty, or freedom, on factions, essentially "what air is to fire" in _Federalist 10_. Otherwise, the minority get discriminated against, even down to the individual. Moreover, on Wikipedia, a majority may be of those who are unwilling or unable to verify themselves. They could be not only the figments of our imagination but the felons in society, recently released from prison.
One simple solution, probably more on the accountability topic, would be to give some sort of notification of verified status. Other checks and balances also appear in order because of the awkwardness of arguments I've seen, besides the invasion of privacy. If Wikipedia editing is a community, then its community values hit you in the face rather than provide fairness. Of course regional bias also exists.
Vincent <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.