Don't you just love our politicians?

[keith_d]

So long as it was our phones the Americans were bugging and our internet activities they were snooping on the politician's response was, "what has happened has damaged national security" and needed to be referred to a parliamentary select committee.

Now it turns out their phones were being monitored too, and suddenly, this "has raised 'deep concerns' among European citizens" and ""a lack of trust could prejudice the necessary cooperation in the field of intelligence-gathering."

So that's one kind of hypocrisy for them, and another for us.

In answer to your question.

No.

I have actually been thinking alot lately about politics in this country. One of the things which I have been thinking about is how you can really show your displeasure not so much at policies, but how these policies are created.

For example my annoyance that parliament is not a debate anymore (if it ever was), just a bunch of school children jeering and "Scoring points" and you will never get two parties into a room to openly discuss major issues with a view to finding some common ground to build from. For a politician to say something along the lines of "I see the point of the Honourable Gentleman, I had not thought of that. It is something we should explore further" because that is just seen as weak and conceding not a point of progress for the collective thinking.

If I was in government I'd shamelessly steal ideas off the opposition, and when challenged on it I'd simply say why wouldn't I implement a good idea just because it was someone else's?

nobody has a monopoly on good ideas.

Me too. But it seems now they would be accused to not staying true to the grass roots.

The is though pretty much all good ideas now refining to actually work, and there is no discussion on how to refine them.

It also seems that the fabric of how our government is made up is to make it difficult for idealists to really have an effect, rather then people who just want to be in charge.

[keith_d]

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

I have actually been thinking a lot lately about politics in this country.

I'm still waiting for someone to show a correlation between vote gathering ability and the skills needed to run a country. Getting elected (in the UK) revolves around two things - looking good in front of cameras and saying the right things to the selection committee. Neither of these have any obvious connection to economics, management or jurisprudence.

The only thing to be said for democracy is that the alternatives are worse.

What you are talking about is the problem with representative democracy rather then democracy as a principle. Direct democracy doesn't have this problem, as everyone votes directly on every issue. Equally the debates would come from individuals who are interested in the topic and have done their research and had a lot of thought and discussion on it already.

I also don't think representative democracy can work any more as there are too many issues. You find yourself agree with one party on one reason and disagree on another. Not that what they say has any connection with what they do.

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

Me too. But it seems now they would be accused to not staying true to the grass roots.

I thought the grass root of a life of public service was doing whats best for the country no matter what cost to myself, Mr Paxman?

Originally Posted by keith_d

I'm still waiting for someone to show a correlation between vote gathering ability and the skills needed to run a country. Getting elected (in the UK) revolves around two things - looking good in front of cameras and saying the right things to the selection committee. Neither of these have any obvious connection to economics, management or jurisprudence.

The only thing to be said for democracy is that the alternatives are worse.

Quite the opposite.

Generally speaking labour has better policies for times of recession and the torys for times of booms (when their policies arent just straight up retarded that is).


We usually elect labour in the booms and Tories in the busts. Like generals in wars we elect the government we should have had last time.

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

What you are talking about is the problem with representative democracy rather then democracy as a principle. Direct democracy doesn't have this problem, as everyone votes directly on every issue.

I think I'd need to quit my job

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

Equally the debates would come from individuals who are interested in the topic and have done their research and had a lot of thought and discussion on it already.

and then we'd either vote for what one of them suggested or what some pretty celebrity told them too instead.

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

I also don't think representative democracy can work any more as there are too many issues. You find yourself agree with one party on one reason and disagree on another. Not that what they say has any connection with what they do.

direct democracy can't work either, unless it's severely restricted.

Perhaps restricted to only those directly affected, Comrade.

Or perhaps the larger problem with democracy is the fact for it to work people have to take the time. Direct democracy worked in Ancient Athens as in order to vote you had to be present at the debate. Now that is not really possible as everyone is busy nowadays. Or rather it would be very difficult to be able to get time off work at the right time for issues that mattered to you.

Interestingly a way to deal with this problem at least in part is to make politics much more local. It also means people can see a much more direct link between tax increases and decreases services. The issue with this is the greater tax take is in the south, but the greatest need to government run services is in the north (very broadly speaking to illustrate the point). Its a very simplistic explanation, but I haven't fully figured it out in my head so can't quite explain it. Also I think to really make it clear would take several pages.

Originally Posted by ClunkintheUK

Or perhaps the larger problem with democracy is the fact for it to work people have to take the time. Direct democracy worked in Ancient Athens as in order to vote you had to be present at the debate.

in one city state for only about 150 years. And from my recollection it required slaves to essentially drag people down to vote.