Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00130)

At 12:25 AM 4/10/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Alex,
>If we had a Parliamentary system, Newt Gingrich would be running the country.
> Now that may give me great pleasure and satisfaction, but I doubt you would
>enjoy it.  The parliamentary system makes for very efficient government, but
>it does little to protect the minority from the excesses of whomever wins the
>majority.  That is why parliamentary systems tend to be very unstable in
>times of crisis.  In point of fact, a very good case can be made that it was
>the weakness of a parliamentary system that allowed Hitler to take power.
>With all due respect to our British friends on this list, I find it difficult
>to regard as free a country with an Official Secrets Act and no judicial
>review.
>
>Chuck the Barbarian MTI, FTSA
>Heretic
>Troublemaker

Chuck:

He might have been, but only for a little while, and he wouldn't be running
it now! He'd have lost a "vote of confidence" long ago, and his own party
would have "divided in the lobhy" and chucked him out! Now, the question is:
do we want stability at any price or do we want liberty? The two things may
not necessarily be complimentary! As to Hitler, he took power because 98%of
the German people voted him into office in a totally honest election!The
German's wanted Hitler, the German's loved Hitler...they only got unlovinmg
when he lost! I know you've seen "The Triumph of The Will"...those Germans
weren't cheering that way because they were afraid of Hitler! Now, we may
not have an official secrets act, but we certainly have the equivalent! Or
else why did we have "The Pentagon Papers" brouhaha? Do you know the
threaats that folks with a security clearence like mine have to listen to
when they leave the service? O.K. they don't have Judicial Review and we do.
I've never known a Brit who seemed to feel deprived.

alexis the anglophile, MYI, FTSA
>
>