Good Morning BOXY,

Welcome to the forum.

Lincoln defined democracy as "government of the people,
by the people, and for the people." In practice - pure
democracy would mean that every citizen would have the
right to participate in every decision, a situation that
would lead to complete chaos.

In practice, the societies we consider democratic are
those that have institutionalised procedures for
periodically choosing among contenders for public office.
We have a "Representative Democracy". That is we (the voters)
elect representatives who are responsible for making
political decisions.

In order for a democracy to thrive there are several basic
conditions that need to have been met -

Tolerance of dissent - a tolerance of criticism and of
dissenting opinions is fundamental to democracy.

Access to information. A democracy requires its citizens to
make informed choices. If its citizens or their
representatives are denied access to the information they
need to make these choices, or if they are given false or
misleading information, the democratic process becomes a
sham.

Diffusion of power - if power is diffused and no one
group can obtain a monopoly over it, the prospects for
democracy are enhanced. We do distribute power among various
branches of government - and among state and local
governments.

There are more prerequisites for democracy - but these will
suffice for now. What is ultimately more
important than formal restrictions on the abuse of
government power are informal restraints. These restraints,
expressed in widely shared norms and values, set limits
that public officials dare not violate. These underlying
assumptions about the "rules of the game," are an
invisible and vital part of any democratic system.

However, as we've seen over the past recent weeks - not everone
played by the "rules of the game." And, they may pay the
price at the next elections.

BOXY - Can I suggest a different format that is easier to read instead of a block of words, which some people just could not be bothered reading, here are your words given a little spacing, which one would you prefer to read, the original or this one.

We get to vote for a leader of a party that, as history has shown, can be replaced overnight. This has been replicated multiple times within the last decade. Question? after we have voted, do we have a say in how our country is run? We vote for a party but the promises have been divided in their importance (obviously to the pollie).
Is Australia truly democratic?

Does the average Aussie get a chance to voice an opinion?

Why does Greg Hunt give a stamp of approval to the health insurance magnates to increase their rates to struggling families, regardless of their multi million dollar profits?

Why did Bob Hawke introduce a "sin tax" many decades ago where the price of a nice cold beer increases incrementally every six months?

Why do the pollies think that privatisation relates to cheaper rates for punters? history has proven that the end result is not in favour of the punters.

Australia had enough gas reserves to last a thousand years, what happened to that?

australia also had enough oil to supply neighbouring nations for a century or two, please explain?

We now buy our oil at the US rate when it goes up and the Singapore rate when it goes down.

Thanks Canberra. Greenslips, privatise and become cheaper?

Do i have a Harbour Bridge to sell you, i'll throw in the Opera House for nothing. It would be interesting to hear from you folks, i'm not made of tissue paper, be as brutal as you like.

i encourage robust debate, respect, and learn from perspectives that i have not considered. I look forward to your opinions, cheers

PS: Can I suggest a different format that is easier to read instead of a block of words,

Yep. That's why the Irish invented Paragraphs.

Jayb correct, makes it easier to read, hope others on here take note and use them.

No, we're not a Democracy. Democracy does not hand the reigns to minorities.

It's a good thing that Philip S couldn't use a red pen. Boxy might have got a complex. At least what Boxy says makes sense, unlike the person who has conniptions whenever I mention him. That's the one who needs educating. Boxy writes like Rudyard Kipling compared with that person.