Community does not depend on the color of one's skin or the religion he subscribes to It depends solely on the moral values we hold to be inviolate. A moral person can and will work together with other moral people to the betterment of the community that they have together created. This community can be a block on a street or a whole neighborhood. It can even be a whole country or group of countries as long as moral values are the strings that attach is to each other. Without morality there can be no trust and without trust there can be no community and until we learn once again how to form communities based on moral values we will remain lost like so many of the commenters here.
I know nothing about this quote other than what someone else has written briefly, however, it seems to me . . . “Satyat Nasti Paro Dharma”. “There is no religion (or law) higher than Truth”.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Do you know the letter (J)esus did not show up in any of the ancient written alphabets until about five or six centuries ago. a.k.a. did not exist twenty-one centuries ago.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Remember the earlier quote on Truth, then you should know this about the letter [J] as well as any contradicting statements within any of the written books, which, btw can never be proven True, no matter which one you have read and decided one over the other as belief-truth, a.k.a. opinion.
@@c4prantik Your dear leader fekendra fuddi won by lying non stop to idiots like you, who bought his bullshit wholesale, now stop trolling people in comments sections who are horrified at that and get a life
Just the thoughts and program I have been looking for. We all need to work together to become more aware and work towards beneficial changes to get Democracy back and all that it entails.Thank you Eric Liu !!
Reading the comments section is sure to confirm how frustrated our democracy is right now. Trust is at an all time low because humility and character continue to be lacking upstream of our government. "Power without character is a cure worse than the disease." In a democracy such as ours, we get the leaders we deserve. DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA by Alexis de Tocqueville might be the best resource for understanding the valuable contribution that the American form of Democracy (yes, as a Republic, we are not a pure Democracy) has made to the world thus far. It is indeed worth fighting for. But will we prove to develop the character to fight for it? Let us hope so. Mr. Liu, I can't stomach your idea of Civic Saturdays. Definitely not for me. But it may placate the many who are determined to rid their experience with the traditional world religions. You are right about civic morality flowing upstream of government. In our pluralistic society, religion (a shared sense of community values and morals at the civic level) has informed and always will inform our free democracy. Quote from the David Foster Wallace THIS IS WATER speech, “There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship-be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles-is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive.”
@Ryan Jackson no comment section anywhere is an example of democracy in action - it's this lack of standards and any understanding that has us where we are. just look at the nonsense arguments here devoted to democracy versus republic. no one here could even give you a definition of either one! of course this country is going down the drain when we can't even define our most basic and foundational meanings. providing a definition or accepting that we are a democratic republic should end the argument but you can see that is too advanced for this comment thread to handle - making thema's point. the most one could argue is that comment threads - this or any other - is an example of democratic expression. action? that is exactly what the problem is; people don't even know what that means anymore despite gems like actions speak louder than words being around for centuries! we have way too much expression and way too little action; that should be clear to anyone.
Belief implies faith. We don't need faith we need fact. Finance Capitalism and corporate entities being given rights but not responsibilities has effectively crippled democracy world wide. When Capital Punishment can be applied to a multi national corporate entity , democracy will reincarnate.
That's a god damn interesting idea. If they want to be treated like people, let's demand they take on responsibility. In relation to the impact they have on society and how they benefit from said society. Capital punishment for corporate entities. Interesting.
To revive any belief all we need is new evidence. I have been a ardent believer in democracy due my experience in China and the U.S. 45 years ago. But I am having profound doubt watching the changes in world in recent years, especially China and the U.S. Rather than to preach faith, why not use reason to review our belief based on newly available facts? Why do we need a "new religion"?
I think he's confused, rebuilding communities rather than the religion of citizenship he's talks about would be a better path. What is a citizen anyway?
I don’t even want to hear platitudes anymore. It’s never going to be enough. We the people... Blah blah blah blah, what they have done to the people is unacceptable. They discredit those with credibility, and credit the unscrupulous and profane. This guy is so scared, because he realizes the ship is moving fast and has no rudder. Full speed ahead! Full speed ahead!! It’s going to be awesome.
Please don't lose faith in ordinary people. At the most unexpected moments, we can be insightful; we can exercise our inherent power to achieve the changes that are so obviously urgently needed. I'm fed up with smartarse pessimism. "
It's simple: you need to understand that just because a lot of people around you agree with you doesn't mean the *majority* of the country agrees with you. Also, it's a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. There's a difference.
how to define legitimacy for a regime?who set the rule to define?what makes you think democracy is legitimate and socialism is not?there should be more alternative to form a government...be it imperialism,monarchy etc...the end result is that people are happy with the performance of the government...we called it good governance or bad governance...can the government deliver its promise and grow its country? if democracy is so good why Arab spring is a failure? what happened to chaos in arab countries and europe? do people in US happy wtih the government?can their government ensure fair income distribution?
I believe that China is enjoying the the high growth period under one-party system similar to Taiwan in 1980s. For the time being, the performance of the government is defined by economy only and people are willing to ignore the corruption of the ruling body to some degree. In the long run, a more sustainable political system needs to be considered.
Lugh Summerson Yeah for the greater good. Just like Mao and his Great Leap Forward, and every other politician and technocrat. There is no benevolent Philosophy King.
Very well said Mr. Liu, but your religious narrative begs the question: is it worth reviving our belief in democracy? The speech would be much more valuable if the first word in the title is "WHY", instead of "HOW". That seems to be a question many people like Mr. Liu himself evades.
@@AManWithaWoodenleg2 this guy's parents fled China to Taiwan during the communist revolution. People who fled nations with communism/dictators actually appreciate democratic process more than people who are born into democracy.
He is not a Communists. Because his parents moved to Taiwan like many people in Taiwan now. Taiwan have a democratic government which always stand the opposite of China and China is always threaten Taiwan. Also, he is an American, he is educated in the US. Therefore, I think he must know the important of democracy.
For starter, STOP all regime change policies and END all wars. Second, start investing in education, science, environment, health and human qualities. If America and the West could do all that, then democracy would not be a delusion.
He does not need to preach to the listeners of TED. They are well educated and understand how democracy works. The real world out there is the true test of democracy where one person-one vote system may not bring the desirable outcome. Just look at Iraq for example. The premature experiment results in chaos. Some countries are just not ready yet.
Belief in democracy requires actual democracy. Polymath genius Jared Diamond in a recent online presentation and Q&A put our chances of remaining a democracy at 51%,
Most of the comments made thus far demonstrate what has happened to our American population since Civics ceased to be taught in our education system. The result is a dumbed-down populace with no understanding of civic responsibilities. And the point of Mr Liu's talk has been completely overlooked: As we put our civic responsibilities into practice the effect will be the improvement of our communities, more inclusion into our society of the disenfranchised and an overall improvement of our collective cynicism.
Eric Liu I appreciate your efforts .Mankind and civilization have been longing for Democracy .But povery needs a more realistic and materialistic democracy .2/3 of China are still very poor.I suggest you would read Sylvie Bermann-former French Ambassador to China and you and your fellows would concentrate on :Democracy and Povery to help address this historical and chronic maladie of China history-and the Poor Chineses..Thank you and wish you success...
True Democracy, as it was explained to me in school, is not possible with humans I hear and see today. they are too stupid, too arrogant, too obsessive, too...well, individual. nevermind that the concept could only properly work in small areas. where everyone indeed can have a say in things. beyond that we'd need councils, with representatives...and that way, as we've seen, lies madness.
I dont know where people are getting these metaphors from, but they are out of reality. There are power structures and human rights for this lol. Never seen homeless people making up policies....
@@Humiliator115 so you aren't from Poland where our president was stupid af. He was electrican who still can't speak or write correctly. And also you never seen statistic which shown that there is way less inteligents in population than stupid ones which mean that in democracy, where every vote have the same power, stupid ones are much powerful than inteligents. This is where people takes those quotes from.
I cannot revive my hope or belief in democracy; it is now a dead core value. Great pain is involved in losing a core value. It was a long, very slow and confused death of a core value. People seem to be locked in an inability to see 360 degrees.
@Swae Ocean How does science want you to assume? I don't think that there os any assumption to science, be it to believes or anything else. I mean, you are directly applying the scientific method by applying logic to this whole question (which the kther fella obviously isn't)
so the legitimacy of democracy is on a sheer believe that democracy is legitimate? merely a system of good will and faith???? just pray and have faith. worship democracy. practice civil religion and you'll become enlightened and all will fall in order.. combine religion with liberal democracy. where one idyllically require each person to think and act on their freewill (even though most of them are strategically fed to them) and the other to establish a fundamental unwavering believe before his thoughts and acts . its fundamentally opposite. this speech is so political correct and filled with wonderful promises and phrase but so wrong on so many level.
mmm is he hinting one need to believe in democracy first before he/she have the free will to fulfill his civil duty/right the vote. am i getting this wrong or is there something is wrong..
Good collective decisions can only be made with good collective decision-making systems. In 2500 years of attempts at democracy, we've only insisted on using the objectively worst such systems, mathematically. These are the voting systems in use worldwide today. This is why people think today collective decisions (democracy) are a broken idea, because the systems systematically fail to get it right. But since people can't separate the decision-making system from democracy itself, people blame the population and democracy. Democracy is not "majority rule" or "mob rule". It's the idea that people have a right to influence decisions that affect them. That's all. Our mistake was thinking and insisting that majority rule is a good criteria for making these collective decisions. It isn't and never was,. It is anti-democratic as a principle, in fact, because the minority has ZERO influence. The only thing it achieves is polarization and pitting people against one another. This is another thing people blame the population instead of the culture promoted by the decision system. Democracy is conflict resolution, not conflict escalation. Conflicts will ALWAYS exist in any society, democratic or not. You cannot escape that without invoking a hivemind utopia. To preserve the social contract, the resolution of conflicts should be based on maximizing agreements, not maximizing force. Historically, democracy has never been implemented on systems that maximize agreement. It's no surprise at all that we all feel betrayed by it.
I find it troubling when important decisions are made based on a near 50% split of a population. Such cases are an obvious example that there was a lack of consensus about what to do.
Ryan Jackson the United States have one of the most unfair democratic systems in which a minority can elect a president for everyone and the other MAJORITY is just totally ignored. Not very fair is it?
Respect for the great idea, but not convinced. A distributed system only works when there are enough "healthy" nodes in the system. Let's define "healthy" as making positive contribution to the system. What if there are a large number of nodes aren't "healthy", eg. selfish, profit-driven, taking advantage of the system? While being selfish and profit-driven are the assumptions of capitalism...
The top job titles do not matter, it is how they get the job. If you vote along with everyone else then you live in a democracy. Look up Constitutional Monarchy.
Believe the truth, understand the truth, but where is the truth? Don't think free and democracy is all the truth, no, that's already a religion which people's can't disagree with. is that a truth? The people, the people around you, the people in your city, the people in your country and the people around the world, their feelings is the truth, their happiness is the truth, their pain is truth. Finding out why, is the truth. Without lives, without healthy, no one is free.
"Revive belief" you don't need an alternative to be disillusioned. And there are plenty of alternatives to democracy, you simply can't by yourself impose a different system (unless you're perhaps a dictator who already doesn't live in a democracy). But you can always move to some nobody's land and live in whichever system you prefer, you're perhaps just not going to be as well off as in your present situation.
I am 3 rd generation American and there is no such thing as duel allegiances no duel citizenships we could of but my great grandparents were admit about being Patriots to our country...
Not all regulations are bad for freedom. Some are actually essential for it to have meaning. It's not only the amount of it, but also its quality and aim, what matters for a regulation to be effective in protecting freedom. As such, it would depend on you specifying what kind of regulations you talk about and what you think is their problem, so that a meaningful conversation could happen around it.
You'd also be freer is you could just murder, steal from, or enslave anyone you wish. But somehow we're all better off when you don't have such freedoms.
@@walperstyle Except I don't advocate for taking life, I used it as a blatant example that freedom should be limited. I've also at no point did called upon or based any of this on any feelings of mine.
@@walperstyle Well, I guess we should prioritize iPhone being cheaper, even if it means factory workers are now forced to work 14 hours a day to make a not even half-decent pay that have them starving and destitute. Of course, we'll be back to the 18th century in regards to living standards, and there will be a smaller market available to sell the iPhone for, but who cares! And let's not even talk about those pesky environmental regulations that could be teared down so everything is double-cheap! What? Lead in the air causing brain damage to kids? Or people poisoned by mercury dumped on the bay where all fish they eat comes from? Or forests reduced to nothing and river banks quickly eroding because of the farmland expansion? No problem! /s The problem is less of regulatory matter, and more of shortsightedness. Yes, regulatory bodies will be abused if politicians are left alone, but the solution for this will never be to tear down every regulatory body, that would be to throw the baby away with the bathwater. The problem is excess, unregulated lobby, lack of transparency, lack of control and lack of accountability. Address that instead of blaming regulations for how much you had to pay for your precious little gadgets.
@@walperstyle That it should be limited is already demonstrated to be true, so it really is just a matter of how to do it. Your apparent peeve against central banks doesn't play much of a part in it. It's a matter of developing rules that benefit as many people as possible. Communism doesn't seem to be it, practical examples have shown that the entire society ends up being worse of. China has been having some success, but it has also departed from communist ideals. The models that have shown best results are for instance the ones on certain european countries. People seem to be pretty satisfied with the balances achieved there between their freedoms and other people's freedoms. You obviously need people's contribution to keep public services running, but you don't need central banks (you might want them, but you don't need them). People will almost always wisely decide to outsource their safety, as they might not be karate black belts or expert marksmen or have CIA level intelligence gathering skills, but they can probably hire people who do have those skills - and you probably aren't the most independent mediator for a conflict you're involved in. Again, you don't need monetary engineering for any of this, but it may be to your advantage to do some engineering that gets some more money in your pocket - and you might end up with something similar to the common monetary systems you see today.
Democracy isn't a sustainable idea, nor is it necessarily even a good idea. You guys take much for granted. You can't just assume and assert that democracy is right and true.
At its core, democracy is the idea that everyone who is affected by a decision should have influence in that decision. If you disagree with that, you are saying people should be ruled over. Then, we have the principle of egalitarianism: without an objective way to assign more relevant to the opinion of different individuals, all individuals should be the same. Any attempt at breaking this principle will require the creation of an oligarchy that will have more power to themselves, a corrupt class. So the egalitarian principle behind democracy ensures power does not accumulate unfairly. So denying these two principles as desirable is saying people should be ruled by an oligarchy that holds all power.
@@1ucasvb Your first assertion is incorrect. Just saying that people shouldn't get a say in the lives of other people is not the same as saying people should be ruled over. Not even close. In fact, it's almost the opposite. Second point is also incorrect in more way than one. First of all, breaking away from assumed equality does not require the creation of an oligarchy. Secondly, giving everyone equal say in a democracy provably does not ensure power doesn't accumulate unfairly. Your third point is another incorrect assertion, denying neither of those things doesn't inherently equate to saying people should be ruled, or ruled by an oligarchy. Seriously, you're wrong on every count.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Voting is not democracy, majority rule via voting is not democracy and representative governments elected via majority rule with voting is not democracy. Virtually ALL of these can be done in different and better ways while obeying the basic principle of "equal participation in collective decisions". Look up "types of democracy" for once in your life before you call democracy majority rule. You have never read anything about the subject.
@@IWLDELJ Read it again. I said people should have a say in THEIR OWN LIVES within a society. That means they should have influence in collective decisions that affect them. In a society, EVERYONE have to make concessions due to the benefits and limitations of living in groups. We all share the same reality, we don't live in our own bubbles of reality. Conflicts of interest will ALWAYS exist, and must be resolved. You can do this by force, or you can do this by a voluntary social pact. That's what a social contract is. This is what collective decision are for. Democracy is just a small subset out of all possible ways you can organize society to do collective decisions. It's not right or wrong on itself. We have to give value to the premises of it, which are the two points I talked about. Also, please explain to me how do you intend to give different weights to different individuals without creating an oligarchical hierarchy of power? SOMEONE has to give that power. Can they take it back? Or once it's given it's gone forever? Giving everyone equal power means NOBODY is making the decision of how much power to give to anyone else, which is fair in the absence of an objective measure. Making this power inalienable means nobody can accumulate power. It means any power you have can never be taken away from you. But you cannot assume this replaces the moral code of the individuals in a society, as you probably are doing fro the looks of it. So tell me, please. If you believe: 1) people shouldn't have inalienable power over matters that affect their own lives in their society 2) that some people in this society should have more power over the lives of others than those people have themselves Then how is that not saying you "people should be ruled over by an elite which has more power over society than the rest"?
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist I'm not an American, I don't support current world governments, political systems and their motives and I don't support the current frameworks of democracies or republics. I don't see how the criticisms of the video could be relevant to the core idea that people in a formal society should have inalienable equal power to influence the society they live in. Because that's literally all I'm defending. Nothing more, nothing less. None of this implies voting or "majority rule".
Democracy should not be a "CIVIC RELIGION". It should be a "CIVIC LOGIC". We don't practice democracy because there's some creed. We do it because it is the best, or the least bad, system one can find so far.
we are actually in the post-post modern era... the name hasnt been identified because of well... hindsight. It will be though eventually... and probably labeled as something akin to Idiocracy until we start putting more money into education in America.
This guy is amazing, I am appalled at the plummeting of secular democratic values in my country but this gives me hope. Hats off to him!
Community does not depend on the color of one's skin or the religion he subscribes to It depends solely on the moral values we hold to be inviolate. A moral person can and will work together with other moral people to the betterment of the community that they have together created. This community can be a block on a street or a whole neighborhood. It can even be a whole country or group of countries as long as moral values are the strings that attach is to each other. Without morality there can be no trust and without trust there can be no community and until we learn once again how to form communities based on moral values we will remain lost like so many of the commenters here.
The Taliban, Iran, Saudi Arabia and IS believe they are the definition of morality.
Confucius is civic religion
ehhhhh, morality is subjective, but civic duty can be objective. I think that is literally the point of this.
TED became a place to dumb us down with this type of presentations.
Half-Truths or as close to Truth as one person might become in life.
His tone of voice seemed reminiscent of past US President as well.
I know nothing about this quote other than what someone else has written briefly, however, it seems to me . . . “Satyat Nasti Paro Dharma”. “There is no religion (or law) higher than Truth”.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Do you know the letter (J)esus did not show up in any of the ancient written alphabets until about five or six centuries ago. a.k.a. did not exist twenty-one centuries ago.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Remember the earlier quote on Truth, then you should know this about the letter [J] as well as any contradicting statements within any of the written books, which, btw can never be proven True, no matter which one you have read and decided one over the other as belief-truth, a.k.a. opinion.
I'm from India, i really need this right now...
You just got it.... now stop whining
@@c4prantik Your dear leader fekendra fuddi won by lying non stop to idiots like you, who bought his bullshit wholesale, now stop trolling people in comments sections who are horrified at that and get a life
@@c4prantik You got your win, now stop trolling
I’m here because my teacher made me watch this
Same here
Is ur teacher Graham Alisson
your teacher is getting paid way less than they are worth.
Just the thoughts and program I have been looking for. We all need to work together to become more aware and work towards beneficial changes to get Democracy back and all that it entails.Thank you Eric Liu !!
Reading the comments section is sure to confirm how frustrated our democracy is right now. Trust is at an all time low because humility and character continue to be lacking upstream of our government. "Power without character is a cure worse than the disease." In a democracy such as ours, we get the leaders we deserve. DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA by Alexis de Tocqueville might be the best resource for understanding the valuable contribution that the American form of Democracy (yes, as a Republic, we are not a pure Democracy) has made to the world thus far. It is indeed worth fighting for. But will we prove to develop the character to fight for it? Let us hope so.
Mr. Liu, I can't stomach your idea of Civic Saturdays. Definitely not for me. But it may placate the many who are determined to rid their experience with the traditional world religions. You are right about civic morality flowing upstream of government. In our pluralistic society, religion (a shared sense of community values and morals at the civic level) has informed and always will inform our free democracy.
Quote from the David Foster Wallace THIS IS WATER speech, “There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship-be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles-is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive.”
@Ryan Jackson no comment section anywhere is an example of democracy in action - it's this lack of standards and any understanding that has us where we are.
just look at the nonsense arguments here devoted to democracy versus republic. no one here could even give you a definition of either one! of course this country is going down the drain when we can't even define our most basic and foundational meanings. providing a definition or accepting that we are a democratic republic should end the argument but you can see that is too advanced for this comment thread to handle - making thema's point.
the most one could argue is that comment threads - this or any other - is an example of democratic expression. action? that is exactly what the problem is; people don't even know what that means anymore despite gems like actions speak louder than words being around for centuries!
we have way too much expression and way too little action; that should be clear to anyone.
"Faith is the excuse people give when they don't have a good reason"
Belief implies faith. We don't need faith we need fact.
Finance Capitalism and corporate entities being given rights but not responsibilities has effectively crippled democracy world wide.
When Capital Punishment can be applied to a multi national corporate entity , democracy will reincarnate.
That's a god damn interesting idea. If they want to be treated like people, let's demand they take on responsibility. In relation to the impact they have on society and how they benefit from said society. Capital punishment for corporate entities. Interesting.
To revive any belief all we need is new evidence. I have been a ardent believer in democracy due my experience in China and the U.S. 45 years ago. But I am having profound doubt watching the changes in world in recent years, especially China and the U.S. Rather than to preach faith, why not use reason to review our belief based on newly available facts? Why do we need a "new religion"?
This seemed meaningful but I tuned out.
Let’s make America great again !!! 🇺🇸
🦅 🇺🇸
I think he's confused, rebuilding communities rather than the religion of citizenship he's talks about would be a better path. What is a citizen anyway?
I'm doing my part. Service guarantees citizenship.
I was very sceptical !!!
Well done sir ! Nice talk ! Bit ideal but i felt you bro ! ✊😎
This guy owns a Civic
That was insightful
I don’t even want to hear platitudes anymore. It’s never going to be enough. We the people... Blah blah blah blah, what they have done to the people is unacceptable. They discredit those with credibility, and credit the unscrupulous and profane. This guy is so scared, because he realizes the ship is moving fast and has no rudder. Full speed ahead! Full speed ahead!! It’s going to be awesome.
Please don't lose faith in ordinary people. At the most unexpected moments, we can be insightful; we can exercise our inherent power to achieve the changes that are so obviously urgently needed.
I'm fed up with smartarse pessimism. "
Finally putting Democracy in it's place in the world. Freedom is not a right but a privilege.
If you was born in United States of America it is your birth right
It's simple: you need to understand that just because a lot of people around you agree with you doesn't mean the *majority* of the country agrees with you. Also, it's a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. There's a difference.
For the phoenix to be reborn, first it must be consumed by flame.
how to define legitimacy for a regime?who set the rule to define?what makes you think democracy is legitimate and socialism is not?there should be more alternative to form a government...be it imperialism,monarchy etc...the end result is that people are happy with the performance of the government...we called it good governance or bad governance...can the government deliver its promise and grow its country? if democracy is so good why Arab spring is a failure? what happened to chaos in arab countries and europe? do people in US happy wtih the government?can their government ensure fair income distribution?
I believe that China is enjoying the the high growth period under one-party system similar to Taiwan in 1980s. For the time being, the performance of the government is defined by economy only and people are willing to ignore the corruption of the ruling body to some degree. In the long run, a more sustainable political system needs to be considered.
As a dyed in the wool atheist, I’m afraid I have to admit that I did indeed have a religion after all. Who knew?
Good point about 'civic religion'. It explains why democracy always sounds a bit like unicorn to me.... Too good to be true.
Diversity is our strength
Very good!
Brought to you by Honda
I want to understand English
My allegaince is to republic, to democracy!
Lugh Summerson Yeah for the greater good. Just like Mao and his Great Leap Forward, and every other politician and technocrat. There is no benevolent Philosophy King.
Belief is Blindness.
As Long As You Believe in Something, Accidents will Continue to Happen.
Very well said Mr. Liu, but your religious narrative begs the question: is it worth reviving our belief in democracy?
The speech would be much more valuable if the first word in the title is "WHY", instead of "HOW". That seems to be a question many people like Mr. Liu himself evades.
Socrates just hit the dislike button.
Just a stan ...I don’t need Communists telling me about how democracy works
AManWithaWoodenbrain2 lol
@@AManWithaWoodenleg2 this guy's parents fled China to Taiwan during the communist revolution. People who fled nations with communism/dictators actually appreciate democratic process more than people who are born into democracy.
@@AManWithaWoodenleg2 You can do better than ad hominem attacks. We can all learn from this.
He is not a Communists. Because his parents moved to Taiwan like many people in Taiwan now. Taiwan have a democratic government which always stand the opposite of China and China is always threaten Taiwan. Also, he is an American, he is educated in the US. Therefore, I think he must know the important of democracy.
For starter, STOP all regime change policies and END all wars. Second, start investing in education, science, environment, health and human qualities. If America and the West could do all that, then democracy would not be a delusion.
There's a book titled Democracy: The God That Failed for a reason...
He does not need to preach to the listeners of TED. They are well educated and understand how democracy works. The real world out there is the true test of democracy where one person-one vote system may not bring the desirable outcome. Just look at Iraq for example. The premature experiment results in chaos. Some countries are just not ready yet.
难道不应该基于事实吗？不应该基于逻辑吗？不应该基于规律吗？把民主当宗教？入魔了。
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner; I choose republic.
Belief in democracy requires actual democracy. Polymath genius Jared Diamond in a recent online presentation and Q&A put our chances of remaining a democracy at 51%,
Bob Quigley what qualifies us stopping being a democracy according to him?
I'm glad he likened belief in the government to a belief in religion. I agree with him for all the wrong reasons.
Look at lives of people in US Vs China
Once best possible world teachers educate masses via internet without schooling/universities and is free and accessable.
Most information is already accessible on the internet. Nothing against universities (they should be free though).
Aristotle said these things a loooong time ago
Most of the comments made thus far demonstrate what has happened to our American population since Civics ceased to be taught in our education system. The result is a dumbed-down populace with no understanding of civic responsibilities. And the point of Mr Liu's talk has been completely overlooked: As we put our civic responsibilities into practice the effect will be the improvement of our communities, more inclusion into our society of the disenfranchised and an overall improvement of our collective cynicism.
Dilleydoll it’s your civil duty to give up your individual rights and it’s your civil responsibility to turn in your guns.
Dilleydoll it’s just a flowery way of saying your individual rights will be sacrificed for the greater good.
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Eternal2401 it’s just a flowery way of saying your individual rights will be sacrificed for the greater good.
Eric Liu I appreciate your efforts .Mankind and civilization have been longing for Democracy .But povery needs a more realistic and materialistic democracy .2/3 of China are still very poor.I suggest you would read Sylvie Bermann-former French Ambassador to China and you and your fellows would concentrate on :Democracy and Povery to help address this historical and chronic maladie of China history-and the Poor Chineses..Thank you and wish you success...
If the govt wants our info then I want transparency in who's paying who and what taxes you pay. Otherwise theres no trust
True Democracy, as it was explained to me in school, is not possible with humans I hear and see today. they are too stupid, too arrogant, too obsessive, too...well, individual. nevermind that the concept could only properly work in small areas. where everyone indeed can have a say in things. beyond that we'd need councils, with representatives...and that way, as we've seen, lies madness.
It's alive and well.
What are you preaching?
Grande Eric Liu.
In democracy 2 homeless creeps have stronger voice than well educated doctor
Also 2 wolfs can legally eat one sheep.
I heard that 9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape.
You assume the well-educated doctors is “better” than the homeless
I dont know where people are getting these metaphors from, but they are out of reality. There are power structures and human rights for this lol. Never seen homeless people making up policies....
@@Humiliator115 so you aren't from Poland where our president was stupid af. He was electrican who still can't speak or write correctly. And also you never seen statistic which shown that there is way less inteligents in population than stupid ones which mean that in democracy, where every vote have the same power, stupid ones are much powerful than inteligents. This is where people takes those quotes from.
@@undisclosedidentity9893 I don't get prescription from a homeless
Someone forgot to tell this guy we already live in a Plutocracy.
I cannot revive my hope or belief in democracy; it is now a dead core value. Great pain is involved in losing a core value. It was a long, very slow and confused death of a core value. People seem to be locked in an inability to see 360 degrees.
and accept what? strongmen despots? community 3 piece suited socialists?
I'm ready for a direct democracy form of government. I value taking the middleman out of politics.
WHAT, WE HAVE THIS!!! ugh do you not realilze you can vote for whomever you want in America? who is the middle man? and what is politics to you?
Oh the naivity!
人总是自信到自负，总把自己认为“最好的”仅有的10美元分享给比尔盖茨，他要10美元吗
"Civic Religion" ??? Don't use the distained word - Religion.
@Swae Ocean How does science want you to assume? I don't think that there os any assumption to science, be it to believes or anything else. I mean, you are directly applying the scientific method by applying logic to this whole question (which the kther fella obviously isn't)
RemusKingOfRome5 It doesn’t matter if it’s theocratic or secular, the most deadly belief is the belief in government.
God was removed from society in the 1960’s. Is this what I’d needed to replace it?
so the legitimacy of democracy is on a sheer believe that democracy is legitimate? merely a system of good will and faith????
just pray and have faith. worship democracy. practice civil religion and you'll become enlightened and all will fall in order..
combine religion with liberal democracy. where one idyllically require each person to think and act on their freewill (even though most of them are strategically fed to them) and the other to establish a fundamental unwavering believe before his thoughts and acts . its fundamentally opposite.
this speech is so political correct and filled with wonderful promises and phrase but so wrong on so many level.
mmm is he hinting one need to believe in democracy first before he/she have the free will to fulfill his civil duty/right the vote.
am i getting this wrong or is there something is wrong..
Grammar is important when trying to understand and be understood.
nice artwork in the back
what is it with commies and idealistic landscape art
Ironically, one year later....
democracy is quiet dumb if people are dumb
Good collective decisions can only be made with good collective decision-making systems. In 2500 years of attempts at democracy, we've only insisted on using the objectively worst such systems, mathematically. These are the voting systems in use worldwide today. This is why people think today collective decisions (democracy) are a broken idea, because the systems systematically fail to get it right. But since people can't separate the decision-making system from democracy itself, people blame the population and democracy.
Democracy is not "majority rule" or "mob rule". It's the idea that people have a right to influence decisions that affect them. That's all. Our mistake was thinking and insisting that majority rule is a good criteria for making these collective decisions. It isn't and never was,. It is anti-democratic as a principle, in fact, because the minority has ZERO influence. The only thing it achieves is polarization and pitting people against one another. This is another thing people blame the population instead of the culture promoted by the decision system.
Democracy is conflict resolution, not conflict escalation. Conflicts will ALWAYS exist in any society, democratic or not. You cannot escape that without invoking a hivemind utopia. To preserve the social contract, the resolution of conflicts should be based on maximizing agreements, not maximizing force. Historically, democracy has never been implemented on systems that maximize agreement. It's no surprise at all that we all feel betrayed by it.
I find it troubling when important decisions are made based on a near 50% split of a population. Such cases are an obvious example that there was a lack of consensus about what to do.
Smart
Sikhi = Civic religion(Civic Love, Civic spirit, Civic responsibility)
Research about it. Organised framework is already placed.
发现我词汇量有限
mine too
Much needed after election results in India
皈依狂热
Everyone in this comments section has a collective iq of 7
This comment section scares me lol. Fortunately it's the vocal minority I guess. I think all the sane people stay well away.
You and I are both in the comment seciton.... hmmmmm.
@@mmacgearailt D:
It's not surprising since NA has an average iq in the low 90
Ryan Jackson the United States have one of the most unfair democratic systems in which a minority can elect a president for everyone and the other MAJORITY is just totally ignored. Not very fair is it?
Respect for the great idea, but not convinced.
A distributed system only works when there are enough "healthy" nodes in the system. Let's define "healthy" as making positive contribution to the system.
What if there are a large number of nodes aren't "healthy", eg. selfish, profit-driven, taking advantage of the system? While being selfish and profit-driven are the assumptions of capitalism...
Answer: Ignore reality.
I’m more of a republic kind of guy rather than a democracy.
Because the current politics in the US shows how wonderful it is? ;-)
The top job titles do not matter, it is how they get the job. If you vote along with everyone else then you live in a democracy. Look up Constitutional Monarchy.
@JD jitsu the left didn't go "way left", it was just the right that drifted away.
lol, are we not a democratic republic? technically...
Believe the truth, understand the truth, but where is the truth? Don't think free and democracy is all the truth, no, that's already a religion which people's can't disagree with. is that a truth? The people, the people around you, the people in your city, the people in your country and the people around the world, their feelings is the truth, their happiness is the truth, their pain is truth. Finding out why, is the truth. Without lives, without healthy, no one is free.
You know what's wrong with society? Not enough tribalism. - said communist/fascist would-be-dictator ever and this guy
revive? what is the alternative to democracy? there really isnt one for me.
"Revive belief" you don't need an alternative to be disillusioned. And there are plenty of alternatives to democracy, you simply can't by yourself impose a different system (unless you're perhaps a dictator who already doesn't live in a democracy). But you can always move to some nobody's land and live in whichever system you prefer, you're perhaps just not going to be as well off as in your present situation.
Voluntaryism
I am 3 rd generation American and there is no such thing as duel allegiances no duel citizenships we could of but my great grandparents were admit about being Patriots to our country...
Why do all the applause and cheers of ted talks sound the same?
Canned applause? Cmon
Democracy is not the best system tribalism is
If you are a Neanderthal.
Why would I want to do that exactly?
This Guy 2020
We’d be freer if we didn’t have so much government regulating every aspect of life.
Not all regulations are bad for freedom. Some are actually essential for it to have meaning. It's not only the amount of it, but also its quality and aim, what matters for a regulation to be effective in protecting freedom. As such, it would depend on you specifying what kind of regulations you talk about and what you think is their problem, so that a meaningful conversation could happen around it.
You'd also be freer is you could just murder, steal from, or enslave anyone you wish. But somehow we're all better off when you don't have such freedoms.
@@walperstyle Except I don't advocate for taking life, I used it as a blatant example that freedom should be limited. I've also at no point did called upon or based any of this on any feelings of mine.
@@walperstyle Well, I guess we should prioritize iPhone being cheaper, even if it means factory workers are now forced to work 14 hours a day to make a not even half-decent pay that have them starving and destitute. Of course, we'll be back to the 18th century in regards to living standards, and there will be a smaller market available to sell the iPhone for, but who cares!
And let's not even talk about those pesky environmental regulations that could be teared down so everything is double-cheap! What? Lead in the air causing brain damage to kids? Or people poisoned by mercury dumped on the bay where all fish they eat comes from? Or forests reduced to nothing and river banks quickly eroding because of the farmland expansion? No problem!
/s
The problem is less of regulatory matter, and more of shortsightedness. Yes, regulatory bodies will be abused if politicians are left alone, but the solution for this will never be to tear down every regulatory body, that would be to throw the baby away with the bathwater.
The problem is excess, unregulated lobby, lack of transparency, lack of control and lack of accountability. Address that instead of blaming regulations for how much you had to pay for your precious little gadgets.
@@walperstyle That it should be limited is already demonstrated to be true, so it really is just a matter of how to do it. Your apparent peeve against central banks doesn't play much of a part in it. It's a matter of developing rules that benefit as many people as possible. Communism doesn't seem to be it, practical examples have shown that the entire society ends up being worse of. China has been having some success, but it has also departed from communist ideals. The models that have shown best results are for instance the ones on certain european countries. People seem to be pretty satisfied with the balances achieved there between their freedoms and other people's freedoms. You obviously need people's contribution to keep public services running, but you don't need central banks (you might want them, but you don't need them). People will almost always wisely decide to outsource their safety, as they might not be karate black belts or expert marksmen or have CIA level intelligence gathering skills, but they can probably hire people who do have those skills - and you probably aren't the most independent mediator for a conflict you're involved in. Again, you don't need monetary engineering for any of this, but it may be to your advantage to do some engineering that gets some more money in your pocket - and you might end up with something similar to the common monetary systems you see today.
Having.the.ideology.and
Ecconemy.policyesand
Vertues.of.respe ct.for
One.and.all.
Canon
I dont get wat he s saying... So complex
you will understand when you grow up-not
As an indian...
After this General Election results i can't 🙂
Once Modi trashes India more, the people will wake up.
7 views 18 likes?
ted needs a skip intro button like on netflix. i'm on a roll and i cant hear that lazy jingle anymore
Democracy yay. Religion boo.
Democracy isn't a sustainable idea, nor is it necessarily even a good idea. You guys take much for granted. You can't just assume and assert that democracy is right and true.
At its core, democracy is the idea that everyone who is affected by a decision should have influence in that decision. If you disagree with that, you are saying people should be ruled over.
Then, we have the principle of egalitarianism: without an objective way to assign more relevant to the opinion of different individuals, all individuals should be the same. Any attempt at breaking this principle will require the creation of an oligarchy that will have more power to themselves, a corrupt class. So the egalitarian principle behind democracy ensures power does not accumulate unfairly.
So denying these two principles as desirable is saying people should be ruled by an oligarchy that holds all power.
@@1ucasvb Your first assertion is incorrect. Just saying that people shouldn't get a say in the lives of other people is not the same as saying people should be ruled over. Not even close. In fact, it's almost the opposite.
Second point is also incorrect in more way than one. First of all, breaking away from assumed equality does not require the creation of an oligarchy. Secondly, giving everyone equal say in a democracy provably does not ensure power doesn't accumulate unfairly.
Your third point is another incorrect assertion, denying neither of those things doesn't inherently equate to saying people should be ruled, or ruled by an oligarchy.
Seriously, you're wrong on every count.
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist Voting is not democracy, majority rule via voting is not democracy and representative governments elected via majority rule with voting is not democracy.
Virtually ALL of these can be done in different and better ways while obeying the basic principle of "equal participation in collective decisions". Look up "types of democracy" for once in your life before you call democracy majority rule. You have never read anything about the subject.
@@IWLDELJ Read it again. I said people should have a say in THEIR OWN LIVES within a society. That means they should have influence in collective decisions that affect them. In a society, EVERYONE have to make concessions due to the benefits and limitations of living in groups. We all share the same reality, we don't live in our own bubbles of reality. Conflicts of interest will ALWAYS exist, and must be resolved. You can do this by force, or you can do this by a voluntary social pact. That's what a social contract is. This is what collective decision are for.
Democracy is just a small subset out of all possible ways you can organize society to do collective decisions. It's not right or wrong on itself. We have to give value to the premises of it, which are the two points I talked about.
Also, please explain to me how do you intend to give different weights to different individuals without creating an oligarchical hierarchy of power? SOMEONE has to give that power. Can they take it back? Or once it's given it's gone forever?
Giving everyone equal power means NOBODY is making the decision of how much power to give to anyone else, which is fair in the absence of an objective measure. Making this power inalienable means nobody can accumulate power.
It means any power you have can never be taken away from you. But you cannot assume this replaces the moral code of the individuals in a society, as you probably are doing fro the looks of it.
So tell me, please. If you believe: 1) people shouldn't have inalienable power over matters that affect their own lives in their society 2) that some people in this society should have more power over the lives of others than those people have themselves
Then how is that not saying you "people should be ruled over by an elite which has more power over society than the rest"?
@Martyr4JesusTheChrist I'm not an American, I don't support current world governments, political systems and their motives and I don't support the current frameworks of democracies or republics.
I don't see how the criticisms of the video could be relevant to the core idea that people in a formal society should have inalienable equal power to influence the society they live in. Because that's literally all I'm defending. Nothing more, nothing less. None of this implies voting or "majority rule".
Hmmmm....
Sorry, religion?
Isn't that backward?
Mah
"Truth is not a popularity contest."
- Stefan Molyneux
"Democracy is cancer"
- Me
Move to canada
Democracy should not be a "CIVIC RELIGION". It should be a "CIVIC LOGIC". We don't practice democracy because there's some creed. We do it because it is the best, or the least bad, system one can find so far.
he was using a metaphor to make a point; my God!
Triggered. My goodness!
That sounds like a idea
好大的一锅鸡汤，熬啊熬，只让你闻，不让你喝。
When you overzealous and fanatical about a dead thing !
Come to India the world's largest democracy. You don't require a 15 min talk on this.
There is no Left and there is no Right, there is only The False Left Right Paradigm.
"I have no illusions", I'm just like, you know, going against knowledge because postmodernism rules!
we are actually in the post-post modern era... the name hasnt been identified because of well... hindsight. It will be though eventually... and probably labeled as something akin to Idiocracy until we start putting more money into education in America.