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 > How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area? > Comments

How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area? : Comments

By Kellie Tranter, published 23/2/2010

To foster community democracy we need to create physical and social environments that encourage people to interact with one another.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
OLO already does this OZ Wide but is very Polarized Politically . I wonder if John Hatton is about addressing this issue ?
If it is about Polarization of the Political Landscape I hope he succeeds . I would like to sign my name on my contributions to OLO but then I would have to put up with unpleasant phone calls etc in the early hours of the morning , it's a no no sadly.
Politics is a pretty ugly game at the best of times but never before 2010 revalations has our Country been so divided , it's a divisive idea to engage in Politics , it's the Year of Fanaticism , we are all going to Die John Hatton ! So what's the Point !!
Posted by ShazBaz001, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 10:28:12 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
community democracy could be extended by abolishing both local and state government, the population in australia is far too small for the amount of bureaucrats standing inbetween the community and the decisions....this may seem odd..isn't local government the seat of community democracy? well in theory..but in practice all you get is regulations and more regulations and arrogant idiots elected on the speed hump issue making decisions about all aspects of a community and its everyday life. imho.
Posted by E.Sykes, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 2:12:21 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
We need to reverse the trend towards rampant and selfish individualism that is fostered by the anti-democratic capitalist system
Posted by mikk, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 3:18:01 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
Well said E.Sykes, we are indeed over-governed and 'mis-managed' by battalions of self-serving bureaucrats and 'people's representatives' whose REAL interests include careerism and the accumulation - under a de-regulated, that is, "free" market - of limitless private wealth or Capital, and the power and privileges such wealth commands. The great majority of us are, after all, mere wage slaves under a Capitalist System that divides our communities and society into the haves and the have-nots.

As most of our 'people's representatives' - past and present - are millionaires and our 'executive', policy shaping and enforcing bureaucrats on salaries and other generous benefits that run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, it is naive in the extreme to expect them to be sympathetic to the worsening plight of Working Class and Lower Middle Class Australians, not to mention those already part of the underclass.

Ms Tranter's bourgeois delusion that "The other fundamental requirement for a strong culture of community democracy is governments which disseminate accurate information, which encourage uninhibited discussion and which listen to and act on what citizens say." is just that. The only 'stakeholders' or 'players'they listen to are corporate executives from huge, monopolistic local and foreign corporations, banks and dominant financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, and billionaire owners of "wealth creating" media conglomerates, property developers, arms manufacturers and the like.
Posted by Sowat, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 3:21:48 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 really liked this essay - and I feel the author has something really important to say here - great work! :))

I wrote on a similar theme a few years back - with regard to public space and its relation to civic engagement.

see: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6600

Perhaps with more direct relevance, I also wrote about civics education in my blog.

see:

http://leftfocus.blogspot.com/2009/03/re-invigorating-civics-and-citizenship.html

I hope if there's anyone who's sincerely interested in these issues that they might find something useful in my past contributions as well...

sincerely,

Tristan
Posted by Tristan Ewins, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 7:56:24 PM
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
I think that this article is good as far as it goes.

However, at the broader level, democracy has been almost completely broken for the last 30 years and unless fixed, we will all be powerless to stop the further alienation of which Kellie Tranter writes.

To quote myself:

Bob Hawke actually boasted about his ... failure to democratically consult ... when he claimed that he had enforced "elite as opposed to popular views on immigration."

Over the last 3 decades at least, "elite as opposed to popular views" have been imposed in regard to many other important policy decisions. Examples ... include the removal of tariff barriers to prevent the export of Australian jobs to slave wage economies; the removal of barriers which prevented foreign companies from buying our mineral wealth; the removal of barriers to foreign investors being able to buy up Australian real estate; the deregulation of our finance sector; the privatisation of our retirement income ..., the privatisation of government-owned businesses including Telstra, QANTAS and the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories; and the corporatisation or privatisation of vital resources: water and power utilities, and of infrastructure normally owned and paid for by taxpayers, such as roads and public transport.

There have also been numerous disposals of public parkland, such as 20 hectare Royal Park in Melbourne, and the massive rezoning to urban of "Green Wedges" ... We have also lost publicly owned state banks, insurance companies, and local, state and national services, including road-making, land-development, public housing construction, the prison system and monopolies on marketing agricultural product - such as in the privatisation of the wheat board. The public is the poorer.

We have also seen the imposition of the National Competition Policy on all levels of Government, the forcible amalgamation of local governments, the removal of the rights of local governments ... to oppose local housing and other developments,6 the imposition of costly environmentally destructive projects against the wishes of the local communities, the destruction of farmland and bushland to allow the construction of mines, the threatened imposition of a Chinese-style Internet firewall, etc. (http://candobetter.org/node/1718)
Posted by daggett, Tuesday, 23 February 2010 10:09:53 PM
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
Right there with you, daggett.

>>democracy has been almost completely broken for the last 30 years and unless fixed, we will all be powerless to stop the further alienation of which Kellie Tranter writes<<

Regrettably, the fabled "tipping point", where the momentum is such that the effect becomes permanent, may well already be some distance in the past.

Politics has become a career path, instead of a public service. At every level, we find the entrenchment of a process that is increasingly impenetrable to the ordinary civilian. Unless you have some form of influence - either money, or direct involvement (as a "player") - access to the levers of change, large or small, is impossible.

Even at the local level, it is easy to spot. "Speed calming" humps appear on the road immediately outside the homes of councillors. Planning permissions, so lengthy, fraught and expensive for the individual, are made for the privileged in a heartbeat. Developments that offend every published requirement, for "green space", or "public access", are magically approved.

At State level, it is proportionally worse. The trough is so full of snouts there can be no possibility of any transparency of process. Plans for road closures are made in secret, the government's collusion with privately built tollways only visible after the event. Infrastructure plans appear and disappear at the wave of an election, usually accompanied by massive expenditures on "consultancy reports" that go nowhere.

The article asks, somewhat naively, "Are citizens armed with information about decisions that might affect them and how they can have their say?"

Well of course they aren't. Nor are they likely to be. Why would any office-holder, or individual whose livelihood depended on the cloak of invisibility that surrounds their machinations, permit the balance of power to be shifted away from themselves?

Sadly, grass-roots revolution is the only possible agent for change.

And while we are all cosy and warm in front of our plasmas, enveloped in the pap and dross that passes for information and entertainment, a coordinated armed assault on Canberra by us disillusioned peasantry is, unfortunately, highly unlikely.
Posted by Pericles, Wednesday, 24 February 2010 4:30:26 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
Good speak, Kelley.

I must know as I had a friend who spoke like you. And he made it all the way to the top Speak-shop.

So, the old man was unperturbed by the cost or was he old enough to know that solicitors are best left alone?
Posted by skeptic, Wednesday, 24 February 2010 10:03:45 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
Pericles,

If you are capable of being so nice and complementary on this forum, why the necessity for your comments on other forums to so overwhelmingly consist of personal attacks ("JFK.E Howard Hunt Ex CIA, Accuses LBJ" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330#82211 and "Australia, Afghanistan and three unanswered questions" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10034#162640)?

Anyway, I am glad that you seem to agree with me here, but had you really understood what I wrote and the longer article "Why Queenslanders must demand new and fair state elections" at http://candobetter.org/node/1718 that I quoted from?

Another factor which has obviously broken our democracies even further are the terrorist attacks (allegedly) by Islamist extremists of this century: 9/11, the Bali bombings, the Madrid bombings, the London Tube bombings, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber and other attempts to blow up planes in mid-air.

These have helped create an environment of fear, where it has been easier for Governments to enact laws, which take away our democratic freedoms and, in general, impose unpopular policies on the people.

As a large number of very credible people (http://patriotsquestion911.com http://ae911truth.org etc.) dispute the Official accounts of these attacks and believe it more likely that they were orchestrated by elements within our own Governments, those views should be given serious consideration by anyone concerned about the state of our democracy.

That is what is being discussed on those abovementioned forums.
Posted by daggett, Wednesday, 24 February 2010 10:53:45 PM
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
That may well be true, daggett.

>>That is what is being discussed on those abovementioned forums.<<

But that isn't the topic of this one.

The reason we agree on this topic here, is that we share an understanding that the process of government in Australia is broken. Similar, indeed, to many other highly-developed "democracies", where politics has become a business in its own right, with defined career paths and a "closed shop" ethos. There hasn't been a successful politician from outside these cabals in generations - Turnbull was the latest to try, John Hewson met the same fate - the environment is inimical to external influence.

Politicians are now "a breed apart". They have a sense of entitlement, as in "look, I'm dedicating my life to serving the public", that demands they be treated differently from us ordinary folk. Hence the massive Super that they pay themselves, the protection from taxation, the gold travel cards, the overseas jaunts that they take entirely for granted.

The article takes a rose-tinted view of "strengthening community democracy", which is all very feel-good and fuzzy, but ignores the very nature of the political beast that we are dealing with.

>>These [terrorist attacks] have helped create an environment of fear, where it has been easier for Governments to enact laws, which take away our democratic freedoms and, in general, impose unpopular policies on the people.

No question.

However, these are only symptoms of the problem that the article refers to.

It is the distance between the political process and the people that actually allows them to get away with making these decisions, regardless of the justification they present to the public.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 25 February 2010 8:24:28 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
Kellie
I agree that the people need to get control of the decision making at all levels of governmennt and there are a few obstactls preventing this from happening.

1 Apathy of most of the population.

2 We need to address the bribary (political donations) issue to ensure that elections are not always won by those who spend the most on the election. This will be difficult to change as corporate Australia would like to retain control of government.

3 Here in WA we still have "property votes" in local government elections. If you own property in 130 local government areas then you may vote at least 130 times.

The idea of a "Citizens Handbook" is great but it would need to be prepared by the community and not by the government.
Posted by Peace, Wednesday, 3 March 2010 6:13:37 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
Its just a curiosity, but Kellie Tranter's article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' showed up yesterday, Monday 22 March, at the top of the OLO listing 'Today's most popular' on the On Line Opinion page where new articles are first posted. Here is a screenshot I took recording that event: http://twitpic.com/1a4ib6

The article was still showing up at number two on 'Today's most popular' as at 7:30 AM AEDST this morning. I am just curious as to how the traffic the article seems to have attracted has been generated. I have opened the topic 'Today's Most Popular - An anomaly? in the Technical Support category of the General Discussion area of the Forum in the hope of generating some interest in this phenomenon. That discussion can be reached here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3534

Perhaps the author, or some of the users that posted comments to the article, may have what now seems to be a discussion that has died (at least on OLO) come up on their OLO email alert and have their curiosity aroused, too. Perhaps the author, or some other OLO user, has posted a link to the article (or to this soon-to-be-archived comments thread which itself contains a link to the article) in a blog or other forum from which the article-viewing traffic has come. It would be interesting to know.

The author's second-last paragraph,

"And finally, it [the strengthening of community democracy]
will require “structural” changes in our systems of government
to guarantee first, an “input route” for community opinion,
and second, a “processing system” that means that
community input will be given appropriate weight."

is interesting in juxtaposition with the reaction of the Swiss government to the recent largely symbolic minaret referendum outcome. It seemed to think the people had got it wrong.

Its government that generally seems to be out of touch. Could some unidentified factor be routinely skewing the views of those elevated to represent us?
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Tuesday, 23 March 2010 7:39:56 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
Thanks for having reminded me of this forum, Forrest Gumpp.

I can see how the issues that Kellie Tranter has raised would attract a lot of interest from around the globe and not just in Australia.

---

I agree that the Swiss have a democratic right to ban the construction of more minarets. To me it seems a roundabout way of pre-empting their becoming demographically overwhelmed by non-native cultures.

Why on earth, would Switzerland, with a stable native population, need more minarets, that is unless there is a real prospect that numbers of non-native residents are likely to grow relative to the native population?

Curiously, tonight on ABC TV's "Foreign Correspondent" (http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2009/s2848813.htm) There is a show which seemingly welcomes and celebrates the anticipated overwhelming of the current native population of the US with Hispanic immigration, both legal and illegal.

The current residents of the US were never asked whether or not they would be happy to become an impoverished minority in their own country.

It's curious that President George W Bush, the same criminal warmonger who has killed well over one million in Central Asia and the Middle East by launching aggressive wars, based on the lie of 9/11, has also further opened the floodgates of immigration that is causing the further impoverishment of his own people.

Of course Rudd is attempting the same for no coherent logical stated reason attempting to do the same to this country.

The real and unstated reason is, of course, that a selfish greedy minority stand to gain through population-growth-driven land speculation at the expense of the rest of this society and its future.

---

If Pericles agrees that 9/11 has allowed politicians to "get away" with so many decisions that are completely contrary to our best interests, then it is time that he began to look more objectively than he has thus far at the evidence against what we have been told by our governments of 9/11, for example in the forums "Australia, Afghanistan and three unanswered questions" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10034&page=20 "JFK.E Howard Hunt Ex CIA, Accuses LBJ" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330&page=29
Posted by daggett, Tuesday, 23 March 2010 12:26:48 PM
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
Community Engagement: A question? An essay worthy is a tough one investigating 'Policies of Alienation'.

I would look at organisation's that are suppose to engage directly with the public in civic ways. Among these polices I would start with clinical narrow polices such as one directed at community workers, including NGO's that stipulate that their staff are not to mix with the public they meet through their organisation outside work hours. Ie; Classifying these people as "clients".

I would look at the walls being put up everywhere that undermine the 'goodwill' and 'spirit' of community and show how we are becoming increasingly a society of "Us and Them".

Other policies I would attack are those where public service and NGO staff phone you, text you or send you emails and don't leave their names. I would attack the breakdown in "two-way" community communication principles and show how this facade lacks face. Is based on a loop-sided-artificial deceptive front whereby the 'so called' client, being a civic person speaking to another who is paid/funded by the tax-payer a) is apparently obligated to reveal their details for ID purposes yet b] the staffer is able to hide behind a screen called the public service or NGO, nameless.

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache%3A54cUpR3eg5QJ%3Awww.getinvolved.qld.gov.au%2Fassets%2Fpdfs%2Fbrisbane_declaration.pdf%2BUnited%2BNations%2BBrisbane%2BCommunity%2BEngagement%2BDeclaration&hl=en&gl=au

The politics of alienation is abstruse, as it is subtle and elusive. My concern is that this has become a power play. It disappoints me that NGO's today have joined this practice as if they too have become the "authorities". The balance is an imbalance undermining civic life in reality. ie: You can see these polices divide small towns and, you can see how that dilates across a "whole" infecting all integrated sectors of the national community.

These indices are suggestive. Just one where barriers build hindering 'human potential, fostering healthy relationships based on mutual understanding, trust and respect, facilitating the sharing of responsibilities, to create more inclusive and sustainable communities'. Instead these polices produce the growth of stigma/labels and discrimination. A form of cultural degeneration dividing society before we even begin considering class or equity under capitalism, in a modern technologcial sense.

http://www.miacat.com/
Posted by miacat, Sunday, 28 March 2010 12:59:13 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

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