The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Towards a true democracy > Comments

Towards a true democracy : Comments

By David Donovan, published 9/6/2010

How can we overcome the subjugation of democracy by the major political parties?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
The bit missing from your post, Formersnag, was giving us all marks out of ten for our efforts.

>>Pericles, dim view, but you don't offer any alternatives... davrosz, positive, but still, no offers on electoral reform... Forkes, he was wrong, about the senate... Sad to see you insulting our military & police... Good to see you realising that our, so called leaders are in fact our enemies...Leigh, again i tend to agree...<<

Sadly, after so diligently marking our homework, your only suggestion was to form our own Tea Party.

>>I think caring people like yourself, on this article & others could get an Australian Themed, "Tea Party" Movement off the ground, here in OZ. I suggest, "Cracker Night" 5 November 1605, Guy Fawkes night.<<

Unfortunately, forming a political party in a country 183 years before Europeans landed here, could be considered a touch premature.

In any event, wouldn't the creation of a new Party simply perpetuate the iniquities inherent in the system? If there is one thing we seem to agree on here is that the present environment is actively inimical to people who are not part of the political process. How would validating that system by conforming to its rules help matters along?

The whole point of my "one step at a time approach" is to address this from within. The insistence, first of all, that politicians of any persuasion should honour the commitments they make in order to be elected, is a difficult one to object to, both logically and morally.

If we are to have a "movement" that doesn't turn into the sort that nurses discuss every morning, this would seem a fairly constructive place to begin.

Otherwise, who is going to believe the promises that your Tea Party makes?
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 10 June 2010 8:53:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Formersnag wrote: "Sad to see you insulting our military & police who are good people doing a difficult job."

Sometimes. It's easy to explain why they are necessary to maintain a civilzed society. But think further.

Politicians are happy to fund powerful police forces because it it the police who protect the politicians and force citizens to obey whatever the politicians dictate. We have already agreed that politicians are a bunch of self-serving, power crazed crooks, enemies of we citizens in fact, so how can their hired mercenaries, the police, be anything other than a force for evil? It would be different if police refused to obey some of the wicked tasks they are ordered to do, but we know that almost without exception that they do whatever they are told. Were it otherwise, you would never see pictures of them riding their horses into groups of protesters, bashing them with batons, firing tear gas and water canon... and so on. You might also find them more willing to use their commonsense and discretion about issuing traffic tickets to help raise revenue for the politicians.

The military, unfortunately, also blindly follow the orders of those self-serving, power crazed politicians referred to above. Most of us would support them if they operated within our immediate region to defend Australia, but when they go adventuring off to faraway countries helping the warmongering yanks to bully smaller nations that are no enemies of ours, you have to wonder whether they are really "good" people. Mindless thugs, more likely!
Posted by Forkes, Thursday, 10 June 2010 10:03:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm firmly of the belief that the only way to introduce democracy in this country is with a new party.
A few years ago, a bloke tried to introduce online democracy to the Australian Democrats. Called “the New Democrats”, people were encouraged to post ideas to an open forum, much like OLO.
Apparently, the Democrats found the site a little too democratic; they shut it down.
Another current attempt is senator online, the idea being that:
“SOL's post election website will enable everyone on Australia’s Electoral Roll to vote (free) on important issues and every Bill put to Parliament, with SOL senators voting as you (the majority) direct.”
An interesting concept, but, what about pre election?
Currently, we have 3 theoretically ideologically driven parties – although the ideology of the Labor party is no longer quite as clear as it once was.
This is a bit like offering 20 million people just 3 sizes of shoes.
Who doesn't get annoyed when a government, 2 years into it's term, declares: “we have a mandate...”
In an age when communication has never been quicker or easier, the very idea of not being able to call a democratically elected government to account for 3 years is absurd.
And having as the only watchdogs of government a media controlled by only a few individuals is beyond ridicule.
What is required is a system of Open Democracy, where party members are encouraged to suggest policy and vote on policy in open forum. Once a clear majority opinion (on a local basis) has been achieved, the representative takes it to the national assembly.
In other words, our representative, -our employee- does as we instruct him/her to.
A quaint and bizarre notion, I know, but hey.
I would suggest one of the first policy questions might be, how much do we want to pay our employee? Particularly as neither major party appears to be in favour of collective bargaining...
Posted by Grim, Thursday, 10 June 2010 10:13:12 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10532#173175

King Hazza, Correct as long as people vote #1, for getup/labour, liberals, Red/greens, or nationals, nothing will change.

Politicians from everywhere have been mouthing platitudes, about more transparency & accountability for decades.

The Loony, Left, especially have also been attacking the CEC, as some kind of Raving, Right, Neo Nazi group, for daring to suggest, CIR several decades ago.

Of course the Red/greens got all, their sensible, reasonable policies & principles by copying them from the http://www.democrats.org.au/ but unfortunately they then, twisted, poisoned, these once good ideas with CARS, Communist, Anarchist, Radical, Socialism.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

http://www.reich4.de/Begriffe/sittlichkeit/?lang=en

http://www.cruelhoax.ca/

http://www.cruelhoax.ca/#top

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10532#173196

Pericles again, we have been brainwashed by negative, people, like yourself into, THINKING, that we cannot change anything, so, many do not bother, but i got Tony Abbott elected leader of the Opposition & killed the ETS, just by blogging on OLO & http://www.thepunch.com.au/.

"The pen is mightier than the sword"

The power to change rests with us effectively lobbying politicians to make them bend, to our collective will, with an Australian themed, "Tea Party" style, movement.

Not to be a new political party, there are already too many of them, but to be a Citizen's lobby group, pressuring for effective change.

The US "Tea Party" has been active inside both the Democrats & Republicans to change both candidates & policy.

We can do the same here.

Actually Pericles there already exists in our constitution some punitive sanctions, but so far no citizens lobby groups have used them.

I agree with your idea about "Polly" promises, requiring them all to sign "Stat Dec's" might do it.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10532#173198

Shadow Minister, The http://www.democrats.org.au/ always in their constitution guaranteed a "conscience vote" & many did use it to cross the floor.

Preferences did not stop Pauline Hanson from winning one of getup/labour's safest seats easily.

Compulsory, "Donkey" voting can favour minor parties & independents as much as Major Mistakes.
Posted by Formersnag, Thursday, 10 June 2010 11:35:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Formersnag: << i got Tony Abbott elected leader of the Opposition & killed the ETS, just by blogging on OLO & http://www.thepunch.com.au/ >>

Wow, who would have thought that Formersnag wielded so much influence with his unique style of political commentary?

Incidentally, Formersnag - what you do isn't "blogging". Rather, you post comments loosely related to the articles published at websites that allow anonymous commentary.

To be a blogger, you'd need to write your own articles and publish them online yourself.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 10 June 2010 1:42:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I suggest that there be a grading of bills - so that certain bills only can be passed without calling an election/referendum. I don't know about anyone else, but I for one fail to see the correlation between what a lot of politicians are elected over and what they then do, it boils down to a lot more than election promises, it involves them passing legislation that, if they had ever asked the electorate, they know damn well would never have gotten passed.

For instance, does anyone here realise that the various drugs misuse acts and the illegality of ALL illegal drugs, was never ever the subject of an election? The Politicians and the Medical Board, decided amongst themselves, that certain things we shouldn't have.

The difficulty I have with that is, that if approximately 25% of people use drugs regularly, or have done, then that means that about a quarter of the population not only disagrees with the law, but has been subjected to living in fear of the State kicking down their door as a result.

How exactly can that be justified democratically? That a quarter of the citizens of the State live in fear of the State? Without ever having had a say in what the State should or should not do? It is an interesting question, because it is the reality. How many people here have used drugs, or are related to people who have?

That is the number of people who have lived with the real fear of their door being busted open by armed officers, their house being ransacked and torn apart and whatever the police deem necessary being accepted (up to and including removing wall panels with a sledge hammer).

Do the other 75% of people on here approve of that, that so many should live in fear of the Executive?
Posted by Custard, Thursday, 10 June 2010 2:08:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy