Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why Don't We Fix Faulty Political Systems?

Political system Redesign

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#52 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 31 August 2019 - 05:08 AM

looks like you answered the part you didn't quote, and quoted the part you have no answer for. Maybe take some time to really think about your stance, and examine what part of your past education/indoctrination lead to it. :)

Bringing a boot to a gunfight seems like a recipe to loose a leg to me...

 

You make too many assumptions. I have no allegiances or doctrines. I rarely believe anything that comes out of a politicians mouth, or anything spouted by someone as a truth to support their stance, pertaining to religion or politics. I also regard most pop science articles as extremely suspect, and most of what is on this and other science forums I amuse myself with at times :)

 

You might not be aware of this but I strongly disapprove of people with guns as do many other people.  https://www.cbc.ca/n...port-1.5094690 

 

I suggest you be careful when play with your gun, maybe you will accidently shoot off an appendage or someone else close to you in the process, however I recognize it is your right to do so, in the part of the world you live in. Guns however should have nothing to do with politics. 

 

I can see in a country where the social system is failing the vast majority of people, as it seems is the case where you live, you might feel threatened by those at the bottom end of the food chain, who have no jobs or prospect of finding jobs. It sounds like you must live in a hell hole, since you require a weapon to defend your self. I was going to fly to Canada sometime in the future for a month or two to have a look around, perhaps its a bad idea. 

 

Ideally politicians guide people through a set of very wide goal posts that works for everyone, supplying a safety net, for those with problems. If the politicians and supporters are idiots, setting the goal posts too narrow then political systems will fail, as it seems is the case where you live. Have you ever had an opportunity to shoot a criminal as you ponce down the street, with your gun in your trouser pocket. 

 

Washington DC used to be the murder capital of the US, they banned guns in the capital, and the murder rate went down. If you walk 3 blocks outside of the centre, its a like walking into the backstreets of Johannesburg. Very dodgy, if you had to live there I can see why you might want a gun. The American dream I was told has become a nightmare for many Americans, has the American dream ever not been a nightmare for many Americans.

 

Where I live the government and local authorities employ people in low paid jobs cleaning the streets and cutting the grass etc. In America I guess the government practice job creation via the forces. I did find it rather concerning in Washington DC that high ranking military would fly between the bases and the Pentagon in helicopters with bloody great big missiles underneath of them. One crash and you could take out the Pentagon or the centre of Washington.  If you had a few disgruntled generals they could easily recreate 9/11. 

 

A neat political trick to distract people from the problems at home, is to point out apparent problems over seas and attempt to police them. When a political party loses support why not have a little war to promote patriotism and support. When military forces occupy other countries to support failing political systems and threaten other countries on those borders and try to destabilise them. It is not surprising that the countries under threat, try and acquire bigger weapons as deterrents. 

 

As for political experience, its backed up by a lifetime of observation, and a passing interest in politics. I have also travelled a lot more than most people and speak to a lot of people from different social backgrounds, with wildly different points of view.  

 

The part of the world I currently live in, people often don't lock their doors, no one carries guns, except some of the police, and the police don't appear to shoot anyone. So whilst this is nominally a poorer country than America, and not the wealthiest in Europe, the politicians are getting it right, with far less resources, and the quality of life is in general better than in many wealthier countries. 

 

Is the thread about failing political systems or your infatuation with your tool. :)


Edited by Flummoxed, 31 August 2019 - 09:20 AM.


#53 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2679 posts

Posted 31 August 2019 - 06:57 PM

As for political experience, its backed up by a lifetime of observation, and a passing interest in politics. I have also travelled a lot more than most people and speak to a lot of people from different social backgrounds, with wildly different points of view.  
 
The part of the world I currently live in, people often don't lock their doors, no one carries guns, except some of the police, and the police don't appear to shoot anyone. So whilst this is nominally a poorer country than America, and not the wealthiest in Europe, the politicians are getting it right, with far less resources, and the quality of life is in general better than in many wealthier countries. 
 
Is the thread about failing political systems or your infatuation with your tool. :)

Title and preamble seems more about fixing faults in them, and the difficulties inherent in that.
If you want to talk about a topic(Eg, firearms) in a political and regulatory light, don't be surprised when reason and statistics not based on "my snowflake feelings" are brought up. If you want to spin some accusation when I've directly answered you on your own brought up points (and irony of you deleting your own posts to "save face" or some other strange reasoning) You might want to think BEFORE you press the Post button, rather than trying to recover from a gaffe well after the fact.
It's also worth it to answer questions directly, particularly ones that do pertain to the core topic.
EG:

People are free to not buy a product from a company they don't like the ethics of. They are NOT free to "not buy" a government mandated service. This is a classic debate of personal choices, freedoms, and oversight. What about your local laws and bylaws? Do they actually protect your rights and freedoms as they are currently implemented?

(unanswered)
 

Weather individuals should be forced to pay for those research grants or MIC contracts or whatnot (at gunpoint) is a different topic. Maybe someone's happy living in the mountains raising their own crops and cattle. Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for the trappings of roads, electric vehicle subsidies, water purification, new battery technology, and other things they do not use and do not want? Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for healthcare they don't use? Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for anything they don't directly benefit from?

(unanswered)


  • Deepwater6 likes this

#54 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 September 2019 - 03:25 AM

You have lost it :) The thread is why-dont-we-fix-faulty-political-systems. If you want to start a thread on firearms go ahead make my day :(  I wont post on it. 



#55 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2679 posts

Posted 01 September 2019 - 09:30 PM

You have lost it :) The thread is why-dont-we-fix-faulty-political-systems. If you want to start a thread on firearms go ahead make my day :(  I wont post on it. 

not at all what I said, but I'm guessing your cognitive dissonance isn't allowing you to process things correctly, particularly those twice-quotes questions directly related to faulty political systems and how they need fixing. I'm guessing the dissonance is exasperated by some cultural inability to admit fault or wrongdoing. It's a common trend even if it's a sad one for humanity as a whole.



#56 DanielBoyd

DanielBoyd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 04 September 2019 - 11:29 PM

In a two party state first past the post works. When more parties are involved first past the post is not representative of the electorate. Tactical voting sways the vote, and does not give a true picture, ie if you would like to vote for a Green party and know they have no chance, voting for another candidate from another party who stands a better chance to beat a candidate who you definitely don't want elected, is the way people vote. Some sort of transferable vote if your preferred candidate loses to another candidate might work, and be more representative of the electorate.

 

 

I live in Holland where we have a lot of (probably a little too many!) political parties. You vote for a party rather than for a local candidate. This solves the problem of votes for minority parties being lost (e.g. Lib Dem votes in the UK). If a party just gets 2% of the votes spread over the whole of Holland, these voters still get a representatieve in parliament. Just one example of an alternative (and fairer) voting system.

 

Winner-takes-all is in my view a disastrously undemocratic system. Take the Brexit referendum. 49% of votes cast are taken as irrelevant because 51% voted to leave. "The people have spoken?" Nope, 51% have spoken just a little louder than 49%.



#57 DanielBoyd

DanielBoyd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 04 September 2019 - 11:41 PM

 

Politicians should be prosecuted for deliberate misinformation, not in a countries interests. It should come under treason. (Tony Blair Iraq war for example) (Boris Johnson Brexit) Loss of pension rights, and kicked out of office with no right to stand for office ever again, might be a minor deterrent. Prison might be more effective. 

 

 

Totally agree with you on this one. It is utterly ludicrous that Facebook (that doesn't present itself as a new outlet) gets pummelled for the drivel its social-media users produce and share, while politicians can lie through their teeth and get away with it. There was a recent attempt to take Boris Johnson to court for misinformation but it failed. Not a good precendent. If I was to talk utter nonsense in my job I'd soon be out on the street, but politics seems to actually foster bending/breaking the truth. Perhaps an extension of the debating principle, but no excuse.

 

What you propose would be a certainly be a great step forward in redesigning the political system. The judicial system (in most countries) is supposed to be politically independent. So why don't we have that law?.  


Edited by DanielBoyd, 04 September 2019 - 11:42 PM.


#58 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 03:23 AM

I live in Holland where we have a lot of (probably a little too many!) political parties. You vote for a party rather than for a local candidate. This solves the problem of votes for minority parties being lost (e.g. Lib Dem votes in the UK). If a party just gets 2% of the votes spread over the whole of Holland, these voters still get a representatieve in parliament. Just one example of an alternative (and fairer) voting system.

 

Winner-takes-all is in my view a disastrously undemocratic system. Take the Brexit referendum. 49% of votes cast are taken as irrelevant because 51% voted to leave. "The people have spoken?" Nope, 51% have spoken just a little louder than 49%.

 

There has been some debate in the UK re making the voting system more representative. However it is not in the interests of the main political parties to change what the UK currently has, it would work against them. If you happen to live in a constituency which is hard core labour or conservative, voting is often pointless and amounts to no more than a protest vote, which I think leads to voter apathy. Why vote for an alternative party, in a constituency when the outcome is a forgone conclusion. Election results in the UK are not representative of all the electorate, in the country. Perhaps I should say DUK dis united kingdom. 

 

Voter apathy in Brexit had something like 12 million voters in the UK who didn't vote out of a total of 30million ish who did. Was that 12 million people who abstained because they didn't give a ****, or did not understand what they were voting for. Out of the 52% who voted for Brexit, many of them were pensioners, many of whom presumably are now dead. If the vote was to be held again, I suspect it would be a landslide in the opposite direction. This is likely because people are finally realizing they were lied to or those stupid enough to vote for Brexit have popped there clogs :( 



#59 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 03:25 AM

 

What you propose would be a certainly be a great step forward in redesigning the political system. The judicial system (in most countries) is supposed to be politically independent. So why don't we have that law?.  

 

Lets do it. Rabble raising by politicians who are lying through their teeth, is not good for democracy, or minorities.

 

Edit The Australians I think have a good law, ie you have to vote or have a good reason not to or you are prosecuted. https://www.aec.gov....sory_Voting.htm


Edited by Flummoxed, 05 September 2019 - 04:34 AM.


#60 LaurieAG

LaurieAG

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1515 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 09:58 PM

Voter apathy in Brexit had something like 12 million voters in the UK who didn't vote out of a total of 30million ish who did. Was that 12 million people who abstained because they didn't give a ****, or did not understand what they were voting for. Out of the 52% who voted for Brexit, many of them were pensioners, many of whom presumably are now dead. If the vote was to be held again, I suspect it would be a landslide in the opposite direction. This is likely because people are finally realizing they were lied to or those stupid enough to vote for Brexit have popped there clogs :(

 

If you just keep on trying until you get the electoral answer you want then why don't you be consistent and just dump Double Jeopardy laws and the Magna Carta at the same time.

 

Corbyn (left wing) was elected by 60% of his parties members and he was pro Brexit but 70% of the parties MP's (obviously right wingers) wanted to dump him after the Brexit vote was successful.

 

Probably the best way to fix it is to send all of the right wingers to the right wing party and all of the left wingers into the left wing party as the current feral mongrel parties don't know whether they are coming or going.


  • Deepwater6 likes this

#61 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 06 September 2019 - 05:09 AM

If you just keep on trying until you get the electoral answer you want then why don't you be consistent and just dump Double Jeopardy laws and the Magna Carta at the same time.

 

Corbyn (left wing) was elected by 60% of his parties members and he was pro Brexit but 70% of the parties MP's (obviously right wingers) wanted to dump him after the Brexit vote was successful.

 

Probably the best way to fix it is to send all of the right wingers to the right wing party and all of the left wingers into the left wing party as the current feral mongrel parties don't know whether they are coming or going.

 

 

Corbyn is old Labour, he would like Brexit but with a deal. The conservatives under Edward Heath took the UK into Europe against old Labours wishes, if my fading memory serves, don't quote me.

 

Corbyn is 70 years old, if he gets into parliament it is likely he will be dead or be suffering from dementia before the end of his term. Interestingly Trump is 73 and might already be showing strong signs of dementia.

 

Another law could be if you are past retirement age, you should not be allowed into Parliament ! We have a record breaking number of OAP's in parliament at the moment https://www.telegrap...ort-finds.html 

 

Its a bit too late for education. But related was a conversation from last night, amongst all sorts of BS, I was stone cold sober, my friends were not driving. Some how education started being discussed. In Private schools for example, children are taught they will be leaders, managers, business men etc, they are not taught they will work for someone else. The majority of people receiving their state education are taught that they must find jobs and contribute to society. They are not taught to have aspirations to be leaders. In this sense those that can afford to send their offspring to private schools and to university to study politics or some other worthless subject, are likely to find the only employment they can find is in Politics. 

 

This might be why we see a large number of  members of parliament from minority private schools, which is not representative of the overall population. 


Edited by Flummoxed, 06 September 2019 - 05:11 AM.