Democracy as it is practiced in western countries consists of periodically voting in elections and then leaving the winners to just get on with it with no more binding input from the electorate. Governments can become immensely unpopular and still retain office until an election is due. Politicians have no need to seek voters opinions or input outside of electioneering. It seems nothing we say has any effect, even opinion polls are only noticed when it suits them.

I wonder is there any way we can change our systems of democracy to give the people more of a say. Would there be a way to make recallability (sacking pollies or calling of new elections if enough people wanted it) workable. Are there any other ideas. Could the internet be useful in some way? Will it lead to self goveernment?
Is anyone even interested?

mikk

Then comes the practical buts paramount among these are those who have power via the current system(?) will resist any change they perceive as a threat to that power by fair means or foul.

To illustrate this point consider "the glass ceiling" debate. This has been a focus for 40 years+ and progress is painfully slow even though the change only involves a limited number directly.
If we then extend that number to politicians of all levels and their supporting bases all of which have their own little power kingdoms you have a very much larger "resistant mass". By the time we add those unenlightened souls who don't understand the current system and don't want to we then have belligerent, recalcitrant, hissing and spiting inertia .
Here one only needs to look at the 'republic' debate which on the side of the royalists, is based more on emotion, prejudice than fact.

In other posts I raised the same issue as you by advocating the following:
1. Two legislative bodies Cabinet (national) and the Reps .
2. Make elections on a strictly proportional basis. Similar to the Hare Clark system .
3. All political campaigns limited and reimbursed by the govt.
4. No political parties.
5. Campaigns only on policy ...
6. People vote for policy first
7. Then their choice of candidate as a local member.
8. All parliamentary votes on online with explanations as you suggested.
9. National Vote for ministries in cabinet.
10. Fixed general elections four years.
11. By elections can be held when 45% of the electorate sign a petition demanding same or resignation.
12. Limit the number of consecutive terms three terms in reps, two for cabinet.
13. Independently elected speaker.
14. Increase wages by 20% super the same as everyone else.
15. Stop gold card entitlements for ex’s
16. Trips o/s for reps must be approved by the relevant minister and the cabinet then published.
That’s a good starting point.

No political parties is a good idea in theory. Those exceptional men who devised the US Constitution thought that the new country could operate without political parties. Political parties quickly appeared, but the law of the land did not provide for them. It is a normal tendency for people with common interests in a democracy to unite as a party to support those interests. It is better to recognise that in the law of the land and provide for it than to imagine that it wouldn't happen.

It is my experience that many Australians are overly respectful or cowed by authority. Like some other Australians I am bothered by the fact that there are no checks on the power of the prime minister to make war. Senator Bartlett circulated a petition which called for checks on that power such as open debate in parliament and other checks before a prime minister sends in the armed forces where there is no immediate or evident danger to Australia. I took a copy of the petition with me to a men's club I belonged to. Although several men said they agreed with the petition they were unwilling to put their names on it.

To have accountability it is necessary to create a feeling that citizens have a duty to call their government to account. Periodic elections are not enough.

It is also necessary to make Australia a representative democracy. At present parliamentary do not consider the wishes of their constituency, their conscience of the good of Australia. "They always vote at their parties call, and they never think of thinking for themselves at all."

Mikk its a big problem and I think it was Churchill who summed it up best " demoracy is a terrible form of government but its the best we have"

What we need is another "doctrine of the two kingdoms" except this time it helps lead to the seperation of goverment and captialism which will stop big business and other ugly lobby groups getting their voices heard above that of the people.

Most people agree that democracy is the fairest and most workable solution for the common good of large populations. A majority of those people believe it is the only solution. The idea of Government by the people and for the people is an ideal that has been fought for and for which people have given their whole lives.

It therefore appals us that even this 'perfect' solution does not seem to be working. However, knowing that we can't come up with anything better, we tend to accept the flaws of our own systems because we assume that the only alternative to democracy is unthinkable.

However, democracy per se, is a system that not one country in the current world can lay claim to. It simply does not exist. "By the People. For the People"? It hasn't happened.

Perhaps we should stop listening to those who keep telling us that we already live in a democracy? Uncritical acceptance of this statment gives rise to a sort of fatalism such as that expressed above by Winnie.

We should keep on striving to achieve democracy because, yes, it probably is the best we could have. We just haven't arrived at it yet.

I came across some information on an international conference, They have very interesting panels on identity and a featured panel on Barak Obama and you can also make a real African Safari…

AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
IDENTITY POLITICS ON THE INTERNET
August 27-29, 2009
Organized by Institute of Identity Research (IDmap)
www.idmap-conferences.net
Will be held in Amboseli Wildlife National Park, Kenya
Featured panel: Barack Obama' Election and Kenyan politics of Identity:
Will he identify himself with the World or with his People?

• The Dead line for submission of the Abstracts is 01.05.2009 (200-500 words)
in Word or PDF formats
• The Dead line for submission of full-text papers is 01.07.2009
Preliminary program of the Conference includes the following panels:
• Kenyan 2007 Presidential elections and the Internet
• Traditions and Identity in Kenyan politics: Barak Obama as a Luo
representative of Kenyan identity politics
• Facebook and Identity: do old ethnicity definitions still matter?
• World Identity politics: Case-studies and Comparative Analysis
• Parties and recruitment in the digital world
• Gender, ethnicity and empowerment: what is better to be a white man or a
black woman?
• When religion comes to the Internet: the new ways to build and reinforce
religious identity
• Government on the Internet: new ways to preserve Nation-state and its
identity on the Net
• New English and E-Linguistic: jargon and vocabulary of Internet campaigns
Participants are welcomed to join the following working groups:
• Computers and identity
• Culture and identity
• Mathematical expressions of identity
• Internet and Politics
• Internet Vocabulary
Best Identity MA/PhD Thesis work award:
During the conference the Institute will award the best MA/PhD work submitted
for the evaluation. The work should reveal an original and innovative approach
in the field of Identity with its expression on the Internet. Information
regarding submission procedure can be found on our site or through direct
contact of our Administrators.

www.idmap.net