|
|
Post by johnofgwent on May 5, 2024 10:47:31 GMT
Democracy substantially means - an open, free public discussion. However, this principle conflicts with security and without security you have nothing at all. These two conflicting forces can be balanced if the vast majority of people in a society agree what security is and what should be secure. If they don't, then you have a problem. Then, to make things fall apart even more, you can add corruption It helps to provide a sense of unity in relation to the above if someone is demonstrably attempting to overthrow your government with violence. I doubt many questioned the actions of the government while Dorniers were unloading bomb bays nightly over London’s docklands. Would they have been so acquiescent had they known Coventry was a willing sacrifice made to sustain the illusion we had no idea how to crack enigma No one (apart from ISIS) has tried to reduce London to Aleppo of Gaza for eighty years. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 6, 2024 16:56:01 GMT
A good question, im not sure that it is, democracy is a talking shop that gets nowhere, and muddies the waters on everything, nothing gets done. Doing is better, that mistakes are quickly rectified, or would be by honest people. Democracy in britain does not exist anyway, Sunak lies openly, defies his mandate, back stabs, does not care anyway. If this is democracy then you can shove it. Its a con job, you vote for whoever, then they betray all. He who shouts the loudest wins, as above, the BBC only listens to pressure groups. The silent majority are ignored. Government is too big, the wage bill must halve the national output. Nature has its ways of dismantling systems that dont work, it will go eventually. There must be a precursor in history, that when society gets like this, what happens next....from the past? Anyone know? My guess is revolution, what would that look like? Was the Trump riot a start? You cannot ignore core values for long before hell breaks loose, like no law and order, invasion.....bankrupcy. To rebel then impose the same but not the previous? I suspect parliament has evolved to soak up tax money, drag out all things, for christ sake the house of lords exists. The machinery used to run society needs replacing. All is corrupted. Your comment " or would be by honest people." says it all for me. Do you think Putin is an honest person? Because of democracy in Britain, Sunak can be ditched at the next election. This sensible fact that comes with democracy does not exist in dictatorships. The weakness in democracy is the money power, but even that gets dished at times. From the past, just about all dictatorships get dumped sooner or later. The problem is not in the machinery, it is in the the hands of those who have the greatest potential to influence voters, for me the worst thing to happen to democracy in my lifetime is the social media where all kinds of twisted individuals can conspire to distort truth to their advantage, or to what think is their advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 6, 2024 17:05:51 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? Depends who you are and where you are. I live in London and have no problem in buying and listening to virtually any news media I want — but I’m told that if I go to Liverpool I’d find it difficult to purchase a copy of the Sun. I can’t foresee the need elsewhere in the UK to resort to law or violence to access any news media, nor do I see any administration dictating what information — outside of security and other specific private data — that news media can carry… The Sun lied about the deaths of Liverpool FC football supporters at Sheffield Wednesdays football ground. I'm surprised that anyone buys the Sun in Liverpool. I lived in Liverpool for the first 60 odd years of my life, I never even looked at the Sun once it was bought by Murdoch and turned into a deceitful newspapers that backed the lying bitch Thatcher to the hilt. That's the money power at work. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 6, 2024 17:10:23 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? Good question. Should journalists be exempt from penalties for lawbreaking ? Probably, but for me their greatest crime is to deliberately deceive their readers for politically biased reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 6, 2024 17:13:23 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? Well you obviously don't believe so because you refuse to acknowledge any argument made by what you consider to be "right wing" parties or media lol. That's just one more of your lies about me, seems you think its funny. How sad  |
|
ginnyg2
Full Member
Don't blame me - I voted for someone else.
Posts: 408
|
Post by ginnyg2 on May 6, 2024 18:25:30 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? Democracy? What democracy?  |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on May 6, 2024 18:33:39 GMT
Depends who you are and where you are. I live in London and have no problem in buying and listening to virtually any news media I want — but I’m told that if I go to Liverpool I’d find it difficult to purchase a copy of the Sun. I can’t foresee the need elsewhere in the UK to resort to law or violence to access any news media, nor do I see any administration dictating what information — outside of security and other specific private data — that news media can carry… The Sun lied about the deaths of Liverpool FC football supporters at Sheffield Wednesdays football ground. I'm surprised that anyone buys the Sun in Liverpool. I lived in Liverpool for the first 60 odd years of my life, I never even looked at the Sun once it was bought by Murdoch and turned into a deceitful newspapers that backed the lying bitch Thatcher to the hilt. That's the money power at work. The Sun carried information being peddled at the time by the Police and emergency service personnel. Perhaps journalists should have been less ready to accuse and apportion blame. But even years later, another journal reporting opinions on reactions to the event, caused upset and recriminations and got Boris Johnson into hot water… |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 7, 2024 8:07:02 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? Democracy? What democracy? View AttachmentThe lying distorting picture you posted is an indication of a major problem in a free democratic country like the UK. It needs to be replaced by honesty and objectivity, but for as long as some people will be influenced by such lies, and will help to propagate such lies, it will continue to damage our democracy. Democracy is IMO well worth fighting for, the problem is that too many people are too easily led, so what is needed is for voters to be better informed about the misleading sources of propaganda against democracy, certainly not a switch to authoritarianism led by some extremist unremovable leader. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on May 7, 2024 8:17:38 GMT
Democracy and the freedom of the press, are they worth fighting for? We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional Monarchy with smoke and mirror trapping of democracy designed to fool enough people into accepting a clearly, and demonstrably, false narrative. A false narrative whose sole purpose is to keep the landed and titled gentry very wealthy, by having them sponge off of the working man and woman. All The Best We are a representative democracy. What you appear to rage about is actually capitalism and the 'money power' to influence the running of our democracy. IMO that is the area that needs further improvement, not a switch to a more controlling form of Politics. Capitalism 'for the many, not the few' is IMO the way to go. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 7, 2024 8:32:33 GMT
We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional Monarchy with smoke and mirror trapping of democracy designed to fool enough people into accepting a clearly, and demonstrably, false narrative. A false narrative whose sole purpose is to keep the landed and titled gentry very wealthy, by having them sponge off of the working man and woman. All The Best What you appear to rage about is actually capitalism and the 'money power' to influence the running of our democracy. IMO that is the area that needs further improvement, not a switch to a more controlling form of Politics. Capitalism 'for the many, not the few' is IMO the way to go. No, we are not. I am not raging about anything, much less capitalism; but then I never really expect you to understand even the most basic premises of any argument - you just jump in with both feet only having read what you want to see, not what the other person actually wrote. Nowhere at all did I mention Capitalism, and if you think the Landed Gentry in this country are primarily a product of Capitalism you understand neither Capitalism nor the history of this Country. The People are not sovereign, Parliament is not sovereign. The entity with Sovereignty is the entity that has absolute authority over what becomes law and what does not become law - that is the Monarch. The entity with Sovereignty is the entity that can dissolve Parliament on a whim - that is the Monarch. The entity with Sovereignty is the entity whose approval must be sough to form a new Government, and without which Parliament can not sit - that is the Monarch. The entity with Sovereignty is the entity to whom our Emergency Services (especially the Police) and Armed Forces swear allegiance - that is the Monarch. None of that has anything at all to do with Capitalism and everything to do with Monarchy. But how typical of you to write a response and get literally everything wrong. PS: There is no such thing as "capitalism for the many" the purpose of Capitalism is to concentrate wealth, and so power, in as few hands as possible. Your boyfriend Tony "Tory Lite" Blair tried "capitalism for the many" and the Wealth Gap increased! All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on May 7, 2024 10:10:04 GMT
There is capitalism for the many. The owner of facebook etc, started with nought, Macdonalds started with one small shop. I left home at 18 with just a job, a trainee, living in a bedsit. I have owned, sold quite a few houses, paid off four mortgages, if i thought id ever do that at 18, i would put my own arm around my shoulders, givee me a squeeze, and say " well done mate".
You cannot block the path to wealth, its not how it works, your thinking is paranoid. The sovereign is in charge, in name only. The ladder for wealth is there for everybody, most people want wealth provided, without having to work for it.
If i invent something everyone wants to buy, the government, multi nationals cant get in my way, and they wont want to, what they will do is replicate what ive got. Pro, youve got marxist beliefs, a capitalist society makes money, not stymies it, to control it is to handicap wealth, and everyone would see it. Indeed, what evidence do have?
The wealth gap is the gap between those that get off their asses, and those that dont.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 7, 2024 10:33:47 GMT
There is capitalism for the many. The owner of facebook etc, started with nought, Macdonalds started with one small shop. I left home at 18 with just a job, a trainee, living in a bedsit. I have owned, sold quite a few houses, paid off four mortgages, if i thought id ever do that at 18, i would put my own arm around my shoulders, givee me a squeeze, and say " well done mate". You cannot block the path to wealth, its not how it works, your thinking is paranoid. The sovereign is in charge, in name only. The ladder for wealth is there for everybody, most people want wealth provided, without having to work for it. If i invent something everyone wants to buy, the government, multi nationals cant get in my way, and they wont want to, what they will do is replicate what ive got. Pro, youve got marxist beliefs, a capitalist society makes money, not stymies it, to control it is to handicap wealth, and everyone would see it. Indeed, what evidence do have? The wealth gap is the gap between those that get off their asses, and those that dont. Hang on, I NEVER said Capitalism stymies economic growth. I said it promotes the concentration of more wealth in fewer hands - and that is a fact. The total pool of global wealth is not growing at the same rate as the total pool of global population. Necessarily therefore we can't all be getting richer. The poorest 50% of the population own just 2% of total net wealth. The middle 40% of people own 22% of total net wealth. The richest 10% of people own 76% of total net wealth. Source: World Inequality Report 2022Given that the rich have got significantly richer since the pandemic it is clear that the poor have got poorer The rest of your comments are basically a rehash of the "well he made it rich so everyone can" argument - which is a demonstrably false argument. My father worked 60 hour weeks when I was a kid, in an industry that was a) hard work and b) very dangerous. He never once made it out of the 2nd quintile when it comes to income. So please piss off with the "work had, get rich" bullshit - if that were even close to true half the world would be millionaires. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on May 7, 2024 10:50:02 GMT
No it isnt. If your father worked 60 hour weeks and was not paid well, then he was in the wrong job. A moments thinking can pay big dividends. Ive worked in dead end jobs, a bike mechanic, a porter at boots, that wasnt good enough.
Its not true that we would all be millionaires because i thought it through, your father did not. I know that hurts.... You cant make decent money working for someone else. Oh, you can, but the money earned must be re- invested in a business, thats where the money is. Property is good.
As someone said about land, especially in britain,...they are not making it anymore. No charge...for thinking for you.
Reports should be used as toilet paper. If you want wealth, earn it, there is the red thinking there that it can be handed out....it cannot, it must be earned.sorry about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 7, 2024 18:42:35 GMT
No it isnt. If your father worked 60 hour weeks and was not paid well, then he was in the wrong job. A moments thinking can pay big dividends. Ive worked in dead end jobs, a bike mechanic, a porter at boots, that wasnt good enough. Its not true that we would all be millionaires because i thought it through, your father did not. I know that hurts.... You cant make decent money working for someone else. Oh, you can, but the money earned must be re- invested in a business, thats where the money is. Property is good. As someone said about land, especially in britain,...they are not making it anymore. No charge...for thinking for you. Reports should be used as toilet paper. If you want wealth, earn it, there is the red thinking there that it can be handed out....it cannot, it must be earned.sorry about that. Yeah, it should be earned - except for those at the extreme end of vulnerability that should be helped by the Welfare System IMO. How it is earned, and by whom, is the real issue. As is what happens when too few people have too much money - economic growth stalls, and eventually reverses. Answer me this: Why should an Investment Banker straight out of Uni and 95% of whose work is a) done by an algorithm and b) amounts to gambling with someone else's money with no consequences at all if they get it wrong earn 20 times what a newly trained GP earns for doing a job that a) takes 7 years to train for, and b) involves making life and death decisions on an almost daily basis? I have no problem with people earning more than me. I have a problem with some people earning so much for doing so little of benefit to society, and who when they mess up can ruin thousands of other peoples' lives. I have a problem with people who pretend that the only thing needed to get rich, or even be comfortably off, is a bit of hard work - the evidence shows that is utter bullshit. The vast majority of people work hard and will never be rich. I have a problem with people who lie (not accusing you of such) that Trickle Down works - it doesn't, it never has; every major study into it shows it is a myth. Economics Online, CBS News, The Washington Post, Business Insider, you know, those bastions of "leftist thought" (that was sarcasm by the way) all report that Trickle Down DOES. NOT. WORK. They didn't need 20 year studies to understand that, basic maths, a little bit of very basic socio-economics, and talking to a few people in the bottom 2 quintiles would have shown them that decades ago. There really is ONLY one way to get rich - exploitation. It can take many forms, the most pertinent to this discussion being: 1) underpaying workers for the actual value of their labour, 2) overcharging for goods and or services when their actual "cost to deliver" is calculated, oh and 3) the socialisation of liabilities and privatisation of profits that mass Shareholding has delivered. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on May 7, 2024 22:19:23 GMT
Well you obviously don't believe so because you refuse to acknowledge any argument made by what you consider to be "right wing" parties or media lol. That's just one more of your lies about me, seems you think its funny. How sad You have the consistency of rice pudding. You literally just trashed The Sun, but made no mention of the biased reporting of left wing media. So come on then, if I am lying about you tell us when you last read an article from a right-wing media source? Normal unbiased people can take in information from all sides of the media and then decide what they think is bollocks. You on other hand live in an echo chamber and seek to cancel all voices from the right by calling them liars and questioning their motives. Pathetic really. |
|
