It's the system that's flawed, rather like Douglas Adams described in 'So long, and Thanks for All the Fish':
[i] "I come in peace," it said, adding after a long moment of further grinding, "take me to your Lizard."
Ford Prefect, of course, had an explanation for this, as he sat with Arthur and watched the nonstop frenetic news reports on television, none of which had anything to say other than to record that the thing had done this amount of damage which was valued at that amount of billions of pounds and had killed this totally other number of people, and then say it again, because the robot was doing nothing more than standing there, swaying very slightly, and emitting short incomprehensible error messages.
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said," said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it." [/i]
Ban by law the ability of the central organising party ( left or right) to impose candidates on local organising committees ( of which ever party) so the the locals get to chose their own candidates. Then at the very least you'd have a locally based candidate.
I attended a debate where a party whip said this would make his party "unmanageable".....
Imagine....MPs who owe no allegiance to a central office....
Do we want this party to go down the Swiss (or Austrian maybe?) way of having a referendum on any big decisions? Nuclear, immigration, benefits etc?
Online voting every week on one big topic!
I think an explicit non parliamentary opposition would be able to gain widespread support to demand things from the jokers in westminster-- not shackled by their outdated machine-- using internet for organising etc, the politics must be overt , to discourage sectarianism-- a big problem with the old left-- esp communist party / tankies-- i never vote FOR anything only Against something else at the moment !
Ban by law the ability of the central organising party ( left or right) to impose candidates on local organising committees ( of which ever party) so the the locals get to chose their own candidates. Then at the very least you'd have a locally based candidate.
I'd go further, mandatory to be local to your constituency.
Love the live locally idea, our local MP would have a real squeaky bum moment if that happened!
Always wanted to make architects and housing scheme designers/developers haev to live in their creations for 5 years after they were completed, just to see what it was really like. (Park Hill Flats in Sheffield during the 80s was a big influence on this idea)
Do we want this party to go down the Swiss (or Austrian maybe?) way of having a referendum on any big decisions? Nuclear, immigration, benefits etc?Online voting every week on one big topic!
That's a tricky one. But really why not? Instead of politicians saying 'the people are telling me...' when you know they've never spoken to any one outside of Westminster, unless it's their chauffeur, the new generation of politicians would know what their constituents really thought. Then, the results of the online feedback would filter into the parliament of experts and intelligent, UK-ready decisions would be made.
Now that's accountability.
Technology is there to gather feedback and display/present in an easily usable format, it's used at the large congresses at which we work.
Each "representative" could see what their constituency was favouring, that could be made public so we could all see how the nation and regions were voting - quite exciting. Government for the people, by the people.
Not read the whole thread but I did read camo16's post and largely agree with it. It has a lot of similarities with various flavours of anarchism (whisper it!) which on paper look very attractive. Of course in practice it's much more difficult to implement, not least because at some point it'll probably be screwed by the authoritarian types on both sides just like happened in Catalonia in the Spanish Civil war.
Not read the whole thread but I did read camo16's post and largely agree with it. It has a lot of similarities with various flavours of anarchism (whisper it!) which on paper look very attractive.
An anarchist, eh? Nice one. I'll take that...
Of course in practice it's much more difficult to implement, not least because at some point it'll probably be screwed by the authoritarian types on both sides
But THERE ARE NO SIDES! That's the beauty of the concept. 8)
Blair makes a good point when he says the left is in danger of going back to the party of protest. We want politicians with policies, new ideas and a vision for the future. Not the same old left right rhetoric.
Blair makes a good point when he says the left is in danger of going back to the party of protest.
Ah yes the 'can't beat 'em join 'em' philosophy. Apart from it being morally bankrupt and cowardly beyond all measure, it's ultimately self-defeating. It's sadly ironic that when all and sundry are praising Thatcher for being 'courageous' for sticking to her principles, not a single leading Labour politician has dared stick their head above the parapet. Especially when the argument should be relatively simple to win.
brooess - MemberSecondly: in the UK, most people alive today have seen only one outcome of a [s]Labour[/s] government
The strikethrough game is cheesy I know, but, this is basically true- UK governments get replaced when things are ****. Cameron will leave the country in a mess, Brown left the country in a mess, Major left the country in a mess... 'twas ever thus and is no commentary on any one party.
Blair makes a good point when he says the left is in danger of going back to the party of protest. We want politicians with policies, new ideas and a vision for the future. Not the same old left right rhetoric.
And yet Tony Blair was always extremely light on policy whilst very big on completely meaningless rhetoric.
I never knew what Tony Blair stood for politically and I don't suppose he did either, or that he even cared. Politics was merely a vehicle for personal self-fulfillment.
i would be grateful for an aceptance of post code lotteries and a move away from over centralised government to true regional power.
But it would have to change radically, i don't want to see a westminster gravy train become a local government gravy train.
The other huge problem, too many people in this country vote for what is of direct benefit to them and not to the bigger picture.
No one wants a power station in their area, but we need power so?
No one wants new housing in their area, but we need new houses?
etc, etc.
