Prof. Chan, thank you for engaging in most discussions, regardless of the nature of the questions themselves. This lecture of yours started me thinking about what could be a political system that's to benefit or protect all people. I guess I am not demanding an answer, I guess this is no fast-food stall, and rather beginning my journey of "seek and found". I appreciate your guidance. 🙏
@@kmchan the topic is profound and no one can possibly claims s/he has an impeccable answer to it. Oh! One may believe s/he has it, only because s/he hasn't thought it through. Always like to watch your vids and read your responses to the comments! I hope that the event last Saturday went well, and the friends in bondage have a little bolster. 🙏
所以“majority rules”中的majority 和“少数服從多数”中的多数指的是simple majority(50.01 %)? 三分之二才通过的不是“majority rules”？ At the end, could you go back to the original question "is 'minority obeys majority' true or 'majority respects minority' true or are both true?" If you pose a question, and say a bunch of things, can you answer it at the end?
@@kmchan I feel that you mean that the "majority" in "majority rules" refers to simple majority. And one needs to clearly define what "majority respects minority'" means exactly before asking whether it is true. If "majority respects minority'" means, say, the minority's interests are protected by the constitution and the changes of the constitution requires a super majority, then "majority respects minority" is true, i.e., is a component of democracy.
@@alhambraalhambra734 I attempted to point out the complexity of the issue and hoped that audience of this lecture could give their own answers after serious consideration. I already gave my own answer in the lecture but you could disagree --- majority rule in democracy means simple majority. Super-majority is not more democratic but just gives way to "minority veto". Requiring 2/3 a threshold in election and passing of bills in legislature will simply mean that many seats unreturned and many bills blocked. I think that only in the matters related to basic rights such as constitutional change should practice minority veto. It is particularly important in society with permanent minority. Am I repeating myself?
Dr Chan, as you said you usually teach this course to students at an advanced level and this is the first time you teach online to people who may not have any prior knowledge. So you probably need to expect to repeat yourself again and again. And I neither agreed nor disagreed to what you said; I just asked a question trying to clarify. Even if a student disagrees with you, it is a good thing that he comes up with some arguments, which you can further discuss with him. I don't know whether students in Hong Kong nowadays still only "listen" to their professors without trying to question or even challenge them, or whether professors are still accustomed to the "lecturing" mode of teaching. I do believe that a student who has questions is better than one without questions.
There may be a system better than Democracy. The utmost importance is RESPECT: the respect of mutual existence and of the intrinsic equality. People stand up against tyrannies to fight for their survival, for their rights, and for the others' rights. Someone says that we are naïve. Indeed, those who have lost their naivety are losing their respects.
實在感恩陳教授的教導! 獲益良多!👍👏❤️❤️🙏🙏🙏
Wow, waiting for one whole week 啦. 多謝教授🙏🙏👏👏
謝謝陳教授的教導。
又到星期日學嘢時間。昨/今天香港天氣好, 心情都好好多。
謝謝陳教授,講解得好淸楚.
我同時亦在閲讀戴教授的”民主的未來”.在兩位教授身上獲益良多.
你們已把種子撒在地上,這些種子必定會慢慢成長. 種子有着無比大嘅生命力,在幾困難嘅環境下都可成長.
非常喜欢陈教授的讲解内容，我非常认真的听完了您的讲解，中间还要暂停好几次来回味消化您说的内容。感谢您的上传分享。作为一个大陆人，我一直认为关于民主，自由，法制的教育是大陆基础教育缺失了的很重要的一部分。它的愚民教育让很多我的同胞丧失了逻辑思考的能力，辨别是非的能力，我深感悲哀和遗憾。您，还有戴耀庭先生这样的有良知的香港学者们的存在是香港人的福气。我会保持持续关注，感谢您的授课，受益匪浅。香港是讲中文，粤语的人的耶路撒冷，时代革命，光复HK。
謝謝鼓勵
早晨，陳教授，感謝教導，辛苦教授。
.
好容易明又好Inspire，多謝教授
多謝陳教授，獲益良多🙏🙏
多謝教授為香港人輸出"正面知識"
淺白易明，多謝教授。
謝謝教授的講解🙏🏻
長知識😊
多謝教授😍😍
謝謝老師😄
感謝教授讓更多的人受惠。
多謝教授！
Thank you Dr.Chan💪
Come to join lesson again. Thank professor!
Very much enjoy your lecture.
謝謝陳教授講解🙏🏻
🙏🙏
謝謝🙏👍🏻🍎
Prof. Chan, thank you for engaging in most discussions, regardless of the nature of the questions themselves. This lecture of yours started me thinking about what could be a political system that's to benefit or protect all people. I guess I am not demanding an answer, I guess this is no fast-food stall, and rather beginning my journey of "seek and found". I appreciate your guidance. 🙏
Wonderful! I am also a student of democracy. Can’t offer any absolute answers but will be glad to share my tentative conclusions at the moment.
@@kmchan the topic is profound and no one can possibly claims s/he has an impeccable answer to it. Oh! One may believe s/he has it, only because s/he hasn't thought it through.
Always like to watch your vids and read your responses to the comments! I hope that the event last Saturday went well, and the friends in bondage have a little bolster. 🙏
上堂上堂
👍👏👌🙏🙋♀️
多谢教授科普(ღ˘⌣˘ღ)
教授，在「如何處理多數人暴政」的應對方法 -- 憲法 & 有組織的少數 -- 上，感覺並不能解決這個問題 ⋯⋯
一）憲法製造出來時，已保障了少數了嗎？憲法當時真由真正的智者們創造的嗎？
二）要尋找三分二心存歹念的人改變憲法至惠及、偏袒既得利益者，真很難嗎？
三）要成立到有能力左右大局的有組織的少數，有多難？
⋯⋯
當然，我沒有解決辦法，又也許這已經是最好的辦法，但我還是只能繼續抱持不能盡信這方法能處理多數人可能暴政的想法走下去，繼續小心走下去，不能放心。
大概，想有「安樂晒囉 ⋯⋯」，「以後可以一了百了」的事，是不可能的。我明白，也許現實就是如此。不能懶惰。😜也許人生本就是不停奮鬥，沒有一勞永逸的事。嗯，要接受了。😅
「永遠向前，永不停步」很久以前 City Chain 的廣告歌詞？也許，人生就只能如此。😉
感謝教授分享。🙏
感謝。
繼續前進第三講。😃
真係好似以前一樣
所以“majority rules”中的majority 和“少数服從多数”中的多数指的是simple majority(50.01 %)? 三分之二才通过的不是“majority rules”？
At the end, could you go back to the original question "is 'minority obeys majority' true or 'majority respects minority' true or are both true?" If you pose a question, and say a bunch of things, can you answer it at the end?
Listen again and answer yourself.
@@kmchan I feel that you mean that the "majority" in "majority rules" refers to simple majority. And one needs to clearly define what "majority respects minority'" means exactly before asking whether it is true. If "majority respects minority'" means, say, the minority's interests are protected by the constitution and the changes of the constitution requires a super majority, then "majority respects minority" is true, i.e., is a component of democracy.
進一步講，一个國家裡 一个議員要拿到三分之二票才當選，一个議案要拿到三分之二票才通过，那國家就不是民主國家！？
@@alhambraalhambra734 I attempted to point out the complexity of the issue and hoped that audience of this lecture could give their own answers after serious consideration. I already gave my own answer in the lecture but you could disagree --- majority rule in democracy means simple majority. Super-majority is not more democratic but just gives way to "minority veto". Requiring 2/3 a threshold in election and passing of bills in legislature will simply mean that many seats unreturned and many bills blocked. I think that only in the matters related to basic rights such as constitutional change should practice minority veto. It is particularly important in society with permanent minority. Am I repeating myself?
Dr Chan, as you said you usually teach this course to students at an advanced level and this is the first time you teach online to people who may not have any prior knowledge. So you probably need to expect to repeat yourself again and again. And I neither agreed nor disagreed to what you said; I just asked a question trying to clarify. Even if a student disagrees with you, it is a good thing that he comes up with some arguments, which you can further discuss with him. I don't know whether students in Hong Kong nowadays still only "listen" to their professors without trying to question or even challenge them, or whether professors are still accustomed to the "lecturing" mode of teaching. I do believe that a student who has questions is better than one without questions.
白咭平要下台
白卡平早應自絕於人間啦！
There may be a system better than Democracy. The utmost importance is RESPECT: the respect of mutual existence and of the intrinsic equality. People stand up against tyrannies to fight for their survival, for their rights, and for the others' rights. Someone says that we are naïve. Indeed, those who have lost their naivety are losing their respects.
Try figure out what is a better system. We will come to this in the coming lecture introducing Karl Popper's ideas.
@@kmchan That is good. I am looking forward to the future lectures. The keyword in my comment was in capital: RESPECT.