Josephus,

I'm a sociologist, not an historian.

Do you know what the difference between sociology and history is?

.

Dear Bazz,

.

You wrote :

« The majority elected them [the members of the House of Representatives] and a majority of them elected him [the Prime Minister] … It works, it has worked for a long time … »
.

Yes, Bazz, that’s "representative democracy" and, as you say, it works. But for over a decade now, our compatriots have expressed less and less confidence in the system. Year after year, the polls have registered a growing disenchantment with our so-called “representative democracy”.

They feel that the “representatives” do not represent us at all. They represent the political parties that endorse them for election. Nor do our compatriots, in their large majority, place their confidence in the political parties to represent us. The political parties are influenced and controlled by an exclusive elite of private interests. To such an extent that the parties have literally hi-jacked our so-called “representative democracy” in their own interests and in the private interests of the elite.

The 2018 “Trust and Democracy in Australia” survey carried out jointly by the Museum of Australian Democracy and the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis at the University of Canberra found that only 41% of voters were satisfied with democracy – down from 86% in 2007 and 72% in 2013.

Our federal government is trusted by just 31% of the population. Ministers and MPs (whether federal or state) rate at just 21% while more than 60% of Australians believe that the honesty and integrity of politicians is very low.

The continued decline of political trust has contaminated public confidence in other key political institutions as well. Trust was lowest in political parties (16%) and web-based media (20%).

The situation is similar in the US. Only 40% say they are “somewhat” or “very” satisfied with how democracy works. In the UK and Poland, the rate is 50%. France is 34%, Italy 31%, Spain 25% and Greece 21%.

The problem is not the Westminster system versus a republic as you seem to suggest, Bazz. It’s so-called “representative democracy” – in both systems – that’s the problem.

.

"The problem is not the Westminster system versus a republic as you seem to suggest, Bazz. It’s so-called “representative democracy” – in both systems – that’s the problem. Posted by Banjo Paterson,

So Banjo what is the best system in your opinion?
Do you prefer rule by dictators; China, Korea, or Saudi Arabia, Iran?
Control the minds of the population and have them obey you?
just what system are you espousing as superior.
What we need in Government is intelligent leaders, not party stooges, or quotas.

People who have doubts about democracy should be sent to non-demo ratic countries for a year to see how they like the other options.

Mistrust in our politicians is a good thing. Keeps them tuned in.
If we do not have representatives then we will have to do it ourselves.
Do you feel like going through the bill on changes to the interstate
transmission of fruit fly virus antigens.
Or something as equally exciting as a variation to the free trade act
on soy bean loading charges.

No ? well that is why we have representatives in Canberra.

There maybe, however, some flaws in Australian democracy.

"It is the extraordinary and inordinate influence our elites have over our politicians that has ensured that Australia today is defenceless, with educational standards below Kazakhstan’s, has energy so expensive manufacturing is disappearing and a level of immigration, including welfare immigration, well beyond the capacity of our cities, all the while being doomed to be a net importer of inferior food (if we can afford it) while our best agricultural land is increasingly falling under the ultimate control and direction of the Beijing communists." (David Flint).