SD on 30/4/2011 at 00:34
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
Seriously, would the rest of the world get proper preference voting already?
We've got a referendum on it here next week, but I think the turkeys are going to vote to keep Christmas :(
Xorak on 30/4/2011 at 00:48
Queue went into the spiel about how the US governemt isn't actually democratic, but he forgot to mention that basically everyone there believes it is. That's part of the problem. They defend 'democracy' to the death but don't even have it for themselves.
And I know, lol socialism, but I'll believe until the day I die that the workers owning a company and drawing equable profits from it to help support themselves and their community, is always a better system than a few motherf**kers who own the company and act like disgusting, pigfaced kings that we're forced to bow down to in fear and supplication as if they're gods on earth. What a waste of existence that we let these f*ckers trampel over us as if they are actually better than us. And that we accept it.
I don't even support all the stuff the NDP believes in, but I'm going with them this time around.
New Horizon on 30/4/2011 at 02:22
Quote Posted by Volitions Advocate
Its all screwed up, but I have to say, all of the people talking about how the Conservative government is an affront to democracy is being sensationalist.
There is definitely sensationalism on all sides, but the current "Harper Government" has been doing things that just ain't right. There is definitely something off about Stephen Harper...something sour...but what worries me more is that he keeps getting away with it.
Nicker on 30/4/2011 at 08:34
Funny, the Conservatives keep telling us that Harper haters are just paranoiac conspiracy nuts. This from the party that was first out of the gates with the US style attack ads and a campaign long on fear, rhetoric and short on substance.
A lot of pot-kettle-black hypocrisy from Harper, like his rants against coalitions, implying that they are tantamount to treason, even though he offered to form one with the NDP and the BQ (Quebec Separatists) in 2004. It was OK then but in 2008 it’s treasonous conspiracy. (Thankfully, Stephen's helmet hair is itself, perfectly suited for the application of tinfiol.)
Consensus and cooperation are what we deserved. What we got was King Stephen, hiding rollbacks on environmental legislation and regulation, in the fine print of a budget bill. How sleazy is that? Doing whatever it takes to force his ideological agenda, even breaking his own laws. Contempt of Parliament – a commonwealth first, I believe. Quite the achievement.
There’s nothing tinfoil-hat about calling Harper out for abuse of power. (And it’s not his party that’s an affront to democracy, it’s Harper’s actions.) When the Tories get back to their roots and ditch the tea-baggage, perhaps they will be granted a chance with the reins. But Harper will never deliver that and if he fails to form a majority this time, a certain head with a helmet like coif, will be roiling out the back door of a leadership convention near you. And not a moment too soon.
Queue on 30/4/2011 at 12:52
Quote Posted by Xorak
Queue went into the spiel about how the US governemt isn't actually democratic, but he forgot to mention that basically everyone there believes it is.
Could have sworn I did...
Quote Posted by Queue
Therein lies the misconception found with most Americans and the rest of the world.
Aerothorn on 1/5/2011 at 01:07
Quote Posted by Volitions Advocate
I'm sick of attack ads from ANY party, and I've got to say I think the ONLY party that is running that seems to be honest and transparent to me is the Green Party, but I wouldn't give them my vote considering that my local Green candidate is a 1st year university student in business and managment, who is 4 years younger than i am and has blue hair.
Exactly what does blue hair have to do with leadership?
And I ask this very important question not at all because I also have blue hair.
Muzman on 1/5/2011 at 03:28
I'd be so shocked that he's a Green and he's doing business and management I wouldn't even notice his hair.
Preconceptions...Torn ...Asunder! Prejudices...Failing!! Not much time.
Here I think it'd just about get you kicked out of the course if they found out.
The principle of those proportional systems like New Zealand really appeal to me. Whenever it comes up here most of them say it's unworkable, too unstable for investors etc. This is just the usual confidence guff that relies on investment being too dumb to note that things are inherently unstable anyway, of course (which is often the case, but don't tell them you fool or we won't get their money!). But I think it's also politicians really not enjoying the prospect of being forced to work together and their job description, particularly in opposition, being something other than to destabilise and destroy the other side.
On that point alone the concept is utterly brilliant and virtually essential to the whole concept of democracy, if you ask me. The public should demand this sort of thing every time they complain about how much they are sick of political gamesmanship and general adversarial behaviour (which happens here quite a bit. Dunno about anywhere else, but every other parliament it seems the pollies are promising a disillusioned public that they'll be nicer in future. Never happens of course, but there's some demand for it)
Volitions Advocate on 2/5/2011 at 10:25
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
And I ask this very important question not at all because I also have blue hair.
There is nothing wrong with having any kind of identifiers when it comes to your personality. I used to wear fishnet shirts and paint my nails black, personally I find nothing wrong with it. But I've always been taught that when you are supposed to be professional you dress the part. Which means shaving, cutting your hair, wearing a suit, and taking out your nosering. Nothing against her character, but its the same thing as Van Halen's brown M&M clause. It's an indicator.
Pyrian on 2/5/2011 at 19:05
Quote Posted by Xorak
...the US governemt isn't actually democratic, but he forgot to mention that basically everyone there believes it is.
That's part of the problem. They defend 'democracy' to the death but don't even have it for themselves.
Horseshit. That's a stupid semantic game that's not even true.
Look, political science courses like to distinguish "pure" democracy from a republic, but the general definition of "democracy" is
any system in which "ultimate" authority rests with the people, and such
includes representative sytems.
Xorak on 3/5/2011 at 04:28
I wasn't even referring to the specific, historical differences between a democracy and republic, I'm talking more about the belief that people think they can just elect someone into office once every four years and still believe that that's a viable democracy, but yet have no other real say in anything that goes on.
I know it's pretty damn indecorous to say it, but democracy doesn't work and it never has for any substantial time. It only works good in short bursts. Democracy certainly didn't work in the 'classic' sense with the Greeks and Romans. Like communism, it looks good on paper, but in practice the rich and powerful will always manage to come to power and crush the poor who support them. The majority of people will always trade personal responsibility for the same old bullshit, just to hide their own fear. In truth, socialism would probably fail in the same way, if it was given a shot. And maybe what we have is the best we can ever hope for, and the most that we deserve.
But I'm not against democracy or anything. I support it entirely. I even have a very romantic view and hope of what it could do if people actually cared and worked together. But it will never achieve that.
