The editorial's suggestion is based on a continuance of 'representative democracy', a system that is surely passed its "sell-by date". The fact the editorial does not even attempt to question what other systems of democracy are available, ones which might break the yoke of 'democratised dictatorship' under which we are presently 'enslaved', is indicative of the relationship twixt politicians and the media, thus giving the impression that both politicians and media are indeed 'all in it together' in order to maintain the status quo. That the positions adopted by Alex Salmond and David Cameron in this argument are those purely to cement their own personal ability to exercise their hands on the levers of
That there is an alternative system of democracy available, one which would halve the number of MPs, disband both MSPs in Scotland and AMs in Wales, while returning power to those that matter, namely the people, is not even hinted at. After all, are not we supposed to be cutting our deficit? Should not all ways to accomplish that not be considered? Silly question really, I suppose.
4 comments:
I think the guardian newspaper is the print version of a golem. Quite fitting, in my opinion since it abhors jews and israel. And loves all that is exhibited by socialists and muslims.
Northern Ireland has a provision allowing the holding of a Referendum every 10 years on continued membership of The Union.....it has been so since Sunningdale Agreement I think
Mornin' WfW…
The direct democracy concept may not have been given an airing in this Grauniad piece, but I have read and heard the Guardianista critique of the idea…
If people are 'allowed' to form and vote for their own policies, we would in short order legalise 'angin' and floggin' and legaised male/female relationships between small furry animals, etc. etc.. Then the Swiss quote about them being completely mad… "Did you know that you can't 'ang yer washin' out on Sunday?"
The assumption is that only the 'meritocratic left' has any idea of what is right/pertinent and what is not. No wo/man should be permitted a free thought or act.
My feeling is that after approximately 90 years of universal suffrage, it is clear that representative democracy has been brought into disrepute by a mixture of underhanded elite corruption, party political gerrymandering and an engendered (by the elites) idea that "it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always gets in", so don't bother to think/vote folks.
Direct democracy, removes a lot of that chaff, even if it is an imperfect concept. Any form of democracy is really concerning a discussion between two wolves and a lamb on the question of the forthcoming menu.
The key to the better working of democracy is localism, the smaller the corpus, the more representative of the people's wishes. Couple this with an aggregation of centuries of constitutional law and case law which cannot be overridden by any representative, and one has a reasonable approach, albeit not perfect.
The ultimate of course is the principal that all are free to "do as thou wilt", which is where the furry animals might come in.
Bottom first :-)
In theory, unlikely, and in practice not the experience, for instance, where hanging is discussed and voted on, it is always to end the practice, it is representatives and dictators that reintroduce it (as in the Lisbon treaty).
http://www.eucharter.org/home.php?page_id=9
See 3/b
jic: My opinion of that rag and most of the print media is that it should be torn into strips, perforated and have Izal stamped on it!
TT: Interesting point.......
r_w: ou are of course preaching to the converted........ :)
Post a Comment