|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 29, 2024 23:38:03 GMT
The point about it all was that it worked and no one proposed any system to replace the Lords that could be agreed as better despite many attempts. As regrads the last comment I am not sure why you would find the comment troubling which I assume you do, when there are corrupt elections anywhere in Africa we get protests on the streets of London and often fighting, Tamils occupied Parliament square for months, Sunni and Shiite have been known to come to blows, anti-semitism does not arise from the far right any longer except to a small degree, Sikhs did not like meat being eaten in their community centre, the 2011 riots were very much ethnic group orientated, Lozelles riots were the same and Gaza at the last election was a significant factor as regards who represented some areas. I didn't find your comment troubling at all. Why would I find it troubling? It's easy to misread my comments as I speak so much gibberish so I apologize completely for that and it all applies to me not them The fact is that the Lords could do with reform and there should be a new system, it' the will of the people and same for PR. The majority want both and I don't think that's unfair at all. I won't condemn any 'anti-semites' whatsoever, just as I won't condemn anyone with other such beliefs as they are patriotic in their own way. And I don't think those who are prejudiced against any group, even against blacks, or even white people either nor muslims mean to be and are simply imperfect humans so I won't condemn them To be fair, the Gaza issue has been divisive around the entire world |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Oct 29, 2024 23:49:17 GMT
You are off on a tangent. The problems I refer to are the insinuated lies and derogation from the politicians, the media, and one eyed biased individuals that push their bias whenever and wherever they can. I agree it is not the political system itself that is flawed, it is the use that is made of it. We may disagree on why that is so. I have only expanded on the reasons why it is so, that is all. "that trust has been eroded from Major through Blair" That piece of bigoted nonsense ^^^ COMPLETELY misses the major problem. Now if you had mentioned two Biased newspapers I would have had some agreement with you. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 30, 2024 7:34:05 GMT
Surely the hereditary peer system, the system for electing the Commons (not proportional representation) and much else has always been significantly flawed, so much so that Labour pledged to reform it as far back as 1910 but never has I'm in favour of PR but I wouldn't pretend that it will deliver any better governance than the system we already have - you only have to look around Europe to see that. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 30, 2024 7:49:07 GMT
Surely the hereditary peer system, the system for electing the Commons (not proportional representation) and much else has always been significantly flawed, so much so that Labour pledged to reform it as far back as 1910 but never has I'm in favour of PR but I wouldn't pretend that it will deliver any better governance than the system we already have - you only have to look around Europe to see that. I agree. I don't think that PR will be better but I do think that it is the only viable system now.
The alternative is the current system of huge majorities voted for by a diminishing and unrepresentative pool of the electorate. And that's not sustainable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2024 8:47:27 GMT
There is likely to be a push for even greater democracy than the current iterations, after this fad of strongmen dictators is over, people are understandably sick of the partial democracy we've got in much of the world and actually want even more democracy and participatory politics. They are just pushing the system to give them what they want by protest voting a lot of the time We are probably going to see a strong resurgence of democracy but a slightly better form of it in the medium to long term I don't think the present democratic system is flawed, IMO the main single problem in the democratic system is the freedom within which political lies and insinuations by politicians and the news medias and others, are allowed to pass unchecked. I think democracy itself has limits. Democracy can't efficiently (quickly) mend a situation in which its key institutions have been hijacked by crackpots and prannies. What we have is quite dangerous |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Oct 30, 2024 14:42:51 GMT
Can you point out the bit where it says that?.. You have to follow the processes. Starting with the suggestions put up for discussion by the Commission. LOL, no honestly, you really are a laugh. The unelected and all powerful EU commission do not 'suggest things for discussion' (LOL the very thought) The unelected EU commission propose legislation because the EU parliament, the elected bit of the EU, have no power to do so. Democracy? Don't make me bloody laugh. |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 15:13:17 GMT
Surely the hereditary peer system, the system for electing the Commons (not proportional representation) and much else has always been significantly flawed, so much so that Labour pledged to reform it as far back as 1910 but never has I'm in favour of PR but I wouldn't pretend that it will deliver any better governance than the system we already have - you only have to look around Europe to see that. Better in this context would just mean more representative of the people's will, it probably would do that |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 15:14:03 GMT
I don't think the present democratic system is flawed, IMO the main single problem in the democratic system is the freedom within which political lies and insinuations by politicians and the news medias and others, are allowed to pass unchecked. I think democracy itself has limits. Democracy can't efficiently (quickly) mend a situation in which its key institutions have been hijacked by crackpots and prannies. What we have is quite dangerous In some ways, dictatorships are more efficient |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2024 15:45:01 GMT
I think democracy itself has limits. Democracy can't efficiently (quickly) mend a situation in which its key institutions have been hijacked by crackpots and prannies. What we have is quite dangerous In some ways, dictatorships are more efficient I think it's situational Democracies can work well but getting there means most of the worst fracture lines between different groups have to be ironed out - a democracy can't create social order, it needs to rest on it. |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 15:49:00 GMT
This is true. My view of the world has two components. It's kind of libertarian at the top level, but underneath I personally would like to live in a closed society - in other words, other types of societies must be permitted to exist beyond what the Neoliberal consensus/status quo wants. If people want to live under a different type of society they must be permitted that right.
That's what I think the main problem with the world's politics has been through centuries, we're taught to believe that everyone should hold the same beliefs as us and if they don't there's something defective about them and we should change them (or their society) to be like ours, when in fact, no one has all the answers
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2024 16:21:38 GMT
This is true. My view of the world has two components. It's kind of libertarian at the top level, but underneath I personally would like to live in a closed society - in other words, other types of societies must be permitted to exist beyond what the Neoliberal consensus/status quo wants. If people want to live under a different type of society they must be permitted that right. That's what I think the main problem with the world's politics has been through centuries, we're taught to believe that everyone should hold the same beliefs as us and if they don't there's something defective about them and we should change them (or their society) to be like ours, when in fact, no one has all the answers Reminds me of my geo-libertarian idealism (when i was young) Those who wished society ran differently would be offered their fair equal share of the common inheritance (land) and would be left to create their own society. This experience of nearly freezing to death in winter would serve as a lesson to idealistic youth about the real difficulties of creating a working society. They would come back with an appreciation for the accomplishments of their forebears that came from bitter personal experience. It would be a much better education than going to university and learning political theory. |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 16:35:01 GMT
This is true. My view of the world has two components. It's kind of libertarian at the top level, but underneath I personally would like to live in a closed society - in other words, other types of societies must be permitted to exist beyond what the Neoliberal consensus/status quo wants. If people want to live under a different type of society they must be permitted that right. That's what I think the main problem with the world's politics has been through centuries, we're taught to believe that everyone should hold the same beliefs as us and if they don't there's something defective about them and we should change them (or their society) to be like ours, when in fact, no one has all the answers Reminds me of my geo-libertarian idealism (when i was young) Those when wished society ran differently would be offered their fair equal share of the common inheritance (land) and would be left to create their own society. This experience of nearly freezing to death in winter would serve as a lesson to idealistic youth about the real difficulties of creating a working society. They would come back with an appreciation for the accomplishments of their forebears that came from bitter personal experience. It would be a much better education than going to university and learning political theory. Not really Orac, there are already many thriving closed societies existing within other countries where they are actually prospering. The problem is that the govt wants to impose their values on others. One of the most famous might be the Amish, many of them more or less contribute to each other's needs and have entire communities rebuilt within days, yes days, after major disasters whereas it takes the rest of us much longer There's not really much that's idealistic about such societies, as they already exist, they just can't exist in the way they want to exist because others are imposing their will on them. The govt here has sadly been making life hell for the Amish for example and that's very sad, the govt mean well but they ought to leave them alone |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 16:35:57 GMT
Another example of a closed society living within a society is the whites-only Orania in South Africa
Nothing idealistic about it, although I admit the libertarian world part is idealistic. But without idealism, what is there? Someone has to have some ideals
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2024 16:48:30 GMT
Reminds me of my geo-libertarian idealism (when i was young) Those when wished society ran differently would be offered their fair equal share of the common inheritance (land) and would be left to create their own society. This experience of nearly freezing to death in winter would serve as a lesson to idealistic youth about the real difficulties of creating a working society. They would come back with an appreciation for the accomplishments of their forebears that came from bitter personal experience. It would be a much better education than going to university and learning political theory. Not really Orac, there are already many thriving closed societies existing within other countries where they are actually prospering. The problem is that the govt wants to impose their values on others. One of the most famous might be the Amish, many of them more or less contribute to each other's needs and have entire communities rebuilt within days, yes days, after major disasters whereas it takes the rest of us much longer There's not really much that's idealistic about such societies, as they already exist, they just can't exist in the way they want to exist because others are imposing their will on them. The govt here has sadly been making life hell for the Amish for example and that's very sad, the govt mean well but they ought to leave them alone I have no idea what you are disagreeing with here. I didn't say forming a society is impossible - obviously, it is possible. It just requires far more than disgruntlement or a wish list. The proposal is a double edged sword with both edges positive. Not only would our wayward children get to see their own idiocy up close for themselves, but on the off chance something is built that doesn't fall over in the first winter, we all get a new societal model. |
|
|
|
Post by borgr0 on Oct 30, 2024 16:53:51 GMT
It's easier to form such a society than, increasingly, to make it in our current societies where doing almost anything gets you in deep trouble - as does speaking out or having untoward opinions
If you're inferring I am a child who can't make it and is idealistic etc etc - then you're right, I am much worse than that and have never done anything, even children know better than me
The fact is, we need some kind of libertarian overview to permit such societies to exist in the first place - for people who really want to make it that is, which doesn't include me
|
|
