Is Democracy Obsolete?

Kalimantan Gull · Feb 28, 2017

binky said:
This is just a long winded way of saying that those who didn't vote the way you think they should have are dumb not to understand the issues as well as you do.
I'm not sure you are going to sway many voters with that argument.

I believe I did understand the issues well, and did manage to sway several voters with reasoned thought-out arguments. The ones I didn't sway had reasoned well-thought out arguments of their own.

But most votes in the referendum, on both sides, were won on slogans and fear-mongering and promises that cannot be kept.

So, no I reject your assertion that people who didn't vote my way were dumb, if anything this is cast at voters at large, but I also reject the word 'dumb' as prejudiced and wrong-meaning, democracy requires honest and balanced information and access to this information, and I do cast aspersions at people who don't seek out balanced information and only allow themselves to be exposed to a single world-view.

larus · Feb 28, 2017

Pavilionaire said:
Those 13 million people that didn't vote in the EU referendum had many different reasons for choosing not to vote, e.g. complete indifference, laziness, engaged but unable to decide one way or the other. Given that Farage himself conceded defeat around midnight I think it's fair to say that 90%+ of those 13 million that didn't vote were expecting Remain to win, and by not voting to change the status quo you are - by default - accepting the status quo.

None of those 13 million felt compelled by the Brexit argument to go out and cast a vote in favour of leaving and yet we have a situation where we leave because 37% of the electorate voted for us to leave and 63% didn't.

This is pure speculation on my part by I suspect of the 13 million if push came to shove they'd probably be 2:1 in favour of remaining. For every non-voter who favoured Brexit but thought LEAVE had no chance I suspect there were 2 voters that lent towards REMAIN but thought Remain would win so didn't bother to vote.

You are entitled to your opinion and analysis, but it is as you have already admitted, purely speculation. However, how many people voted Remain based on the complete lies portrayed by the government? I accept that the £350 on the NHS was misleading, but that's, IMO pales into insignificance in comparison to the official lies from government, CBI, BoE, IMF, EU, OBR etc. The only 'negative impact' has been a drop in the value of the pound (from an overvalued level), all other indicators/stats since then have been better than was predicted even if we'd voted remain.

Back to the original theme of this thread, democracy is failing as the general population are realising that the political class and global elite are not honest and are, in general, only concerned with their own success and power. This it across all political parties.

Imagine a world where it was a criminal offence for a politician to deceive the people/other parliamentarians. I accept the need for national security, but so much is lies, deceit and spin.

I'll give 2 examples:
1. It's been recognised for a long time that the pension system is not fit for purpose and was a demographic time-bomb due to the baby-boomers starting to retire.
2. The NHS and funding levels. The reality is no matter how much gets thrown at the NHS, it will get spent (and inefficiently).

Rather than working together for the best interests of the country, these 2 huge issues are treated as political footballs. It's pathetic, and, IMO, it's the behaviour of politicians which has led us to the situation where there is so much anger amongst the public due to the failure to address these issues. BREXIT may have happened because of this or it may have happened anyway, but the political elite treat the populations with disdain. I think the Trump/BREXIT votes are reflective of this.

Baldseagull · Feb 28, 2017

We do not have a system that has been created from the bottom up to be a fair and even way of bringing about the best Governance for all, we have a system that has been eroded from the top down from the absolute power of kings, to retain the most power for those that have it. Through occasional revolution, actual and threatened, powers have been ceded from time to time, but there is a lot further to go to reach a proper democracy.

Kalimantan Gull · Feb 28, 2017

Baldseagull said:
We do not have a system that has been created from the bottom up to be a fair and even way of bringing about the best Governance for all, we have a system that has been eroded from the top down from the absolute power of kings, to retain the most power for those that have it. Through occasional revolution, actual and threatened, powers have been ceded from time to time, but there is a lot further to go to reach a proper democracy.

Is also very true

Kalimantan Gull · Feb 28, 2017

larus said:
Back to the original theme of this thread, democracy is failing as the general population are realising that the political class and global elite are not honest and are, in general, only concerned with their own success and power. This it across all political parties.

Imagine a world where it was a criminal offence for a politician to deceive the people/other parliamentarians. I accept the need for national security, but so much is lies, deceit and spin.

I'll give 2 examples:
1. It's been recognised for a long time that the pension system is not fit for purpose and was a demographic time-bomb due to the baby-boomers starting to retire.
2. The NHS and funding levels. The reality is no matter how much gets thrown at the NHS, it will get spent (and inefficiently).

Rather than working together for the best interests of the country, these 2 huge issues are treated as political footballs. It's pathetic, and, IMO, it's the behaviour of politicians which has led us to the situation where there is so much anger amongst the public due to the failure to address these issues. BREXIT may have happened because of this or it may have happened anyway, but the political elite treat the populations with disdain. I think the Trump/BREXIT votes are reflective of this.

I agree with a lot of this, I'm sure we will disagree on what do do with the NHS but the tenet of your post is spot on.

What I find most interesting is the rise of Trump as a solution to this? Here is a man who has already proved to be highly deceitful in his short time in power, wss exposed as such during the campaign, so how can he be hailed as a response to a dishonest global elite I just cannot comprehend.

Baldseagull · Feb 28, 2017

larus said:
You are entitled to your opinion and analysis, but it is as you have already admitted, purely speculation. However, how many people voted Remain based on the complete lies portrayed by the government? I accept that the £350 on the NHS was misleading, but that's, IMO pales into insignificance in comparison to the official lies from government, CBI, BoE, IMF, EU, OBR etc. The only 'negative impact' has been a drop in the value of the pound (from an overvalued level), all other indicators/stats since then have been better than was predicted even if we'd voted remain.

Back to the original theme of this thread, democracy is failing as the general population are realising that the political class and global elite are not honest and are, in general, only concerned with their own success and power. This it across all political parties.

Imagine a world where it was a criminal offence for a politician to deceive the people/other parliamentarians. I accept the need for national security, but so much is lies, deceit and spin.

I'll give 2 examples:
1. It's been recognised for a long time that the pension system is not fit for purpose and was a demographic time-bomb due to the baby-boomers starting to retire.
2. The NHS and funding levels. The reality is no matter how much gets thrown at the NHS, it will get spent (and inefficiently).

Rather than working together for the best interests of the country, these 2 huge issues are treated as political footballs. It's pathetic, and, IMO, it's the behaviour of politicians which has led us to the situation where there is so much anger amongst the public due to the failure to address these issues. BREXIT may have happened because of this or it may have happened anyway, but the political elite treat the populations with disdain. I think the Trump/BREXIT votes are reflective of this.

And Brexit fixes this how?

larus · Feb 28, 2017

Kalimantan Gull said:
I agree with a lot of this, I'm sure we will disagree on what do do with the NHS but the tenet of your post is spot on.

What I find most interesting is the rise of Trump as a solution to this? Here is a man who has already proved to be highly deceitful in his short time in power, wss exposed as such during the campaign, so how can he be hailed as a response to a dishonest global elite I just cannot comprehend.

Regarding the NHS, may I suggest that 99% of the country would agree with if being free at the point of service and it is a service which we should be very proud of. This issue is that it is never acceptable to question it's efficiency, nor to allow people to make a profit. By this I mean that Labour/Left wingers appear to be happier to pay more for an inferior service. If something can be privatised and deliver a better service to the NHS for less money, then this would be sensible. However, this always results in the accusation of privatising the NHS.

Regarding Trump, of the 2 low calibre candidates I had a preference for him, as for some reason, I really despised Clinton. However, I can see he is a very divisive character and has the potential to cause problems. However, he also has the potential to shake things up and maybe, stop this headlong rush into globalisation which doesn't appear to be helping the average citizen. I think Trumps biggest appeal was his directness and speaking his mind. Whether you agree with his message or not, this directness is a breath of fresh air from the way that politics has been conducted.

larus · Feb 28, 2017

Baldseagull said:
And Brexit fixes this how?

Without having another thread on BREXIT (which I wanted BTW), I am not saying BREXIT does fix this. However, the point of my post was that the political class have lost touch with the voters IMO. So, this was a way to stick 2 fingers up to the political class and say they've had enough. The EU was/is viewed by many just another beaurocratic monstrosity with deals and stitch-ups.

Kalimantan Gull · Feb 28, 2017

larus said:
Regarding the NHS, may I suggest that 99% of the country would agree with if being free at the point of service and it is a service which we should be very proud of. This issue is that it is never acceptable to question it's efficiency, nor to allow people to make a profit. By this I mean that Labour/Left wingers appear to be happier to pay more for an inferior service. If something can be privatised and deliver a better service to the NHS for less money, then this would be sensible. However, this always results in the accusation of privatising the NHS.

Regarding Trump, of the 2 low calibre candidates I had a preference for him, as for some reason, I really despised Clinton. However, I can see he is a very divisive character and has the potential to cause problems. However, he also has the potential to shake things up and maybe, stop this headlong rush into globalisation which doesn't appear to be helping the average citizen. I think Trumps biggest appeal was his directness and speaking his mind. Whether you agree with his message or not, this directness is a breath of fresh air from the way that politics has been conducted.

"This issue is that it is never acceptable to question it's efficiency, nor to allow people to make a profit. By this I mean that Labour/Left wingers appear to be happier to pay more for an inferior service. If something can be privatised and deliver a better service to the NHS for less money, then this would be sensible."

Its tried this with the railways, it failed. Its being tried with the post office, its failing. Sometimes its OK to say that a good service costs money, not everything has to make a 'profit'

"and maybe, stop this headlong rush into globalisation which doesn't appear to be helping the average citizen."

I'm pretty sure that it does help - has helped - the average citizen. People in western countries are as well-off as we've ever been. Not as much as other forms of government would help, but certainly more than a policy of isolation and restricted trade ever could.

.. and back to the thread at large, "Trumps biggest appeal was his directness and speaking his mind." - Yes, absolutely, his whole election is built on slogans and promises that cannot be kept. Another example of a failing democracy.

binky · Feb 28, 2017

Kalimantan Gull said:
I believe I did understand the issues well, and did manage to sway several voters with reasoned thought-out arguments. The ones I didn't sway had reasoned well-thought out arguments of their own.

But most votes in the referendum, on both sides, were won on slogans and fear-mongering and promises that cannot be kept.

Most? You cannot know that.
It could equally be argued that "most" votes were cast against the obvious fear-mongering and false promises of one or other of the campaigns.

Kalimantan Gull said:
So, no I reject your assertion

...

Not my assertion.
It's the accusation I'm leveling at you, for the tone of your original post.

Kalimantan Gull said:
Well: "The population of the country democratically voted in said referendum and took a decision" - I argue that the people of the country voted to either (i) give £350m a week to the NHS, and/or (ii) make all the immigrants leave.

I don't mind the people doing that, but those things were (i) not on the table, (ii) admitted as not being on the table by the government, (iii) confirmed as not being on the table by the government after the referendum happened. Democracy is broken if people can be so easily swayed by slogans. Its also broken if politicians break their campaign promises as soon as they are in power - the Libdems got huge amounts of votes based on scrapping tuition fees, printed pledge cards to that matter, and then didn't vote against tutition fee rises once in power.

If you are promised something with your vote, and then don't get it, there is merely a pretence of democracy

...

Kalimantan Gull said:
that people who didn't vote my way were dumb, if anything this is cast at voters at large, but I also reject the word 'dumb' as prejudiced and wrong-meaning, democracy requires honest and balanced information and access to this information, and I do cast aspersions at people who don't seek out balanced information and only allow themselves to be exposed to a single world-view.

While I agree that there may be some "people who don't seek out balanced information and only allow themselves to be exposed to a single world-view.", I wouldn't cast aspersions at them. It seems counter productive and somewhat smug to do so.

symyjym · Feb 28, 2017

The trouble with our democracy is we and the rest of the world don't know what monkey we will give power to next. They come in and leave a mess and even death and destruction behind them and they are never held accountable.

Baldseagull · Feb 28, 2017

larus said:
Without having another thread on BREXIT (which I wanted BTW), I am not saying BREXIT does fix this. However, the point of my post was that the political class have lost touch with the voters IMO. So, this was a way to stick 2 fingers up to the political class and say they've had enough. The EU was/is viewed by many just another beaurocratic monstrosity with deals and stitch-ups.

I think the problems you reference, NHS and Pensions fail to be properly resolved because the politicians are in touch with the voters. Pensioners vote. A party that wants to win needs to be pensioner friendly, or at the very least, more friendly than the others. There is not enough conviction politics and promoting of what they believe is best, and far too much pandering to the opinion of the people as is, to secure the win.

Gwylan · Feb 28, 2017

Baldseagull said:
I think the problems you reference, NHS and Pensions fail to be properly resolved because the politicians are in touch with the voters. Pensioners vote. A party that wants to win needs to be pensioner friendly, or at the very least, more friendly than the others.

And pensions take up a bigger and bigger share of the budget - it's the biggest single item of government expenditure (and that doesn't take into account that about 50% of the NHS budget is spent on the 65+). This is only going to grow as people live longer and yet no government wants to tackle it because these are the very people who vote.

On the other hand, people under 30 tend not to vote which is why governments tend to ignore their concerns (on education, housing, employment etc).

It does highlight a flaw in democracy: parties look to attract votes not do what's best for the country. It's clear to anyone that to grow the economy, we should be looking to develop our skillbase, look to grow the technology sector and make the UK business friendly. Successive governments (from both parties) have invested in pensions instead - it's not forward thinking

Audax · Feb 28, 2017

Seagull said:
We could maybe make voting compulsory as in Australia http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23810381

Correction: it is not compulsory to *vote* in Australia. It is only compulsory to turn up to the booth and get your name crossed off. What you do once your name is crossed off is up to you: you can put the ballot paper in the box unmarked, or with a non-counting mark on it, and thus "not vote".

What the rule does is make sure that a higher percentage of voters are brought to the trough. It doesn't force them to drink, but much like the average horse ... once you have it right there in front of you, you may as well do it.

The other difference in Australia, when it comes to referendums, is that they require a double majority. Not just a national 50%+ of votes, but also an absolute majority of the states voting in favour as well. If the UK used the same system as Australia then Leave would not have won (because in Australia, the "status quo" wins a deadlock). In 1977 there was a referendum in Australia that achieved a National vote of 62.22% in favour of changing, but the state results came out with 3 states in favour and 3 against. As a result, the proposed change failed to win approval. You can see on the link that this particular vote failed by an effective margin of 9211 votes in Western Australia. The same state recorded over 14,000 invalid votes.

rippleman · Feb 28, 2017

Pavilionaire said:
Those 13 million people that didn't vote in the EU referendum had many different reasons for choosing not to vote, e.g. complete indifference, laziness, engaged but unable to decide one way or the other. Given that Farage himself conceded defeat around midnight I think it's fair to say that 90%+ of those 13 million that didn't vote were expecting Remain to win, and by not voting to change the status quo you are - by default - accepting the status quo.

None of those 13 million felt compelled by the Brexit argument to go out and cast a vote in favour of leaving and yet we have a situation where we leave because 37% of the electorate voted for us to leave and 63% didn't.

This is pure speculation on my part by I suspect of the 13 million if push came to shove they'd probably be 2:1 in favour of remaining. For every non-voter who favoured Brexit but thought LEAVE had no chance I suspect there were 2 voters that lent towards REMAIN but thought Remain would win so didn't bother to vote.

And I speculate that of the 13 million if push came to shove they'd be 2:1 in favour of leaving!!

Like any election / referendum, you have to get your supporters out to win. Clearly Leave did a far better job of turning their voters out than the Remain campaign. This may be because those who voted Leave were more passionate about the cause than the Remainers.

rippleman · Feb 28, 2017

Audax said:
Correction: it is not compulsory to *vote* in Australia. It is only compulsory to turn up to the booth and get your name crossed off. What you do once your name is crossed off is up to you: you can put the ballot paper in the box unmarked, or with a non-counting mark on it, and thus "not vote".

What the rule does is make sure that a higher percentage of voters are brought to the trough. It doesn't force them to drink, but much like the average horse ... once you have it right there in front of you, you may as well do it.

The other difference in Australia, when it comes to referendums, is that they require a double majority. Not just a national 50%+ of votes, but also an absolute majority of the states voting in favour as well. If the UK used the same system as Australia then Leave would not have won (because in Australia, the "status quo" wins a deadlock). In 1977 there was a referendum in Australia that achieved a National vote of 62.22% in favour of changing, but the state results came out with 3 states in favour and 3 against. As a result, the proposed change failed to win approval. You can see on the link that this particular vote failed by an effective margin of 9211 votes in Western Australia. The same state recorded over 14,000 invalid votes.

Not sure that really counts as democracy if you have more votes than the other side but still don't win.

Having said that, we have a Prime Minister who has never stood for election, let alone won one. So our version of democracy is pretty crap too

Brovion · Feb 28, 2017

Kalimantan Gull said:
No, come on, don't be disingenuous, this is a perfectly reasonable debate going on so far. You voted that way, sure, many voted just like I said.

Not being disingenuous. You said "I argue that the people of the country voted to either (i) give £350m a week to the NHS, and/or (ii) make all the immigrants leave." That statement is simply wrong.

If you'd added something like "(iii) Saw through the lies of Project Fear and realised that the EU is a corrupt, undemocratic capitalist club that is throttling the life out of Europe and needs to be destroyed and rebuilt" you might have been nearer the mark as at least you'd have covered all the bases. But as part of nullification of the vote you want to portray all Brexit voters as thick and/or racist.

Doonhamer7 · Feb 28, 2017

Great debate, democracy as we know it in the west is going to change, how rapidly and to what extent could be very scary. The change we are going to see in the next couple of decades is going to be rapid and painful for some. The vote for brexit / trump could be seen as those that have lost their jobs due to globalisation ( a concept created by UK/USA which we lost!) fighting back against a political elite they saw as not in touch with the electorate. The next round of globalisation will see the loss of the white collared workers due to more automation -e.g. Banking. So we have big big decisions to be made which may require some hard non-democratic options, these include dealing with an unaffordable pension system, NHS that is inefficient, less jobs as more and more automation / offshoring occurs, an unaffordable housing market and an education system that is straining. At least we as a country are starting to talk about it and aren't showing interest in extreme far right parties unlike some European countries.

Seagull · Mar 1, 2017

Thank you everyone I enjoyed this debate :thumbsup:

Baldseagull said:
We do not have a system that has been created from the bottom up to be a fair and even way of bringing about the best Governance for all, we have a system that has been eroded from the top down from the absolute power of kings, to retain the most power for those that have it. Through occasional revolution, actual and threatened, powers have been ceded from time to time, but there is a lot further to go to reach a proper democracy.

From the monarchy to the composition of the House of Lords to first past the post to unequal and marginal constituencies etc etc OMG such a long way to go!

symyjym said:
They come in and leave a mess and even death and destruction behind them and they are never held accountable.

Baldseagull said:
There is not enough conviction politics and promoting of what they believe is best, and far too much pandering to the opinion of the people as is, to secure the win.

Politics should be some kind of calling that only the best qualified can be involved in. With total openness and transparency it could be possible. No politician should be allowed to make money for himself/herself (or relatives!) either during or after office based on actions taken in office.

Gwylan said:
It does highlight a flaw in democracy: parties look to attract votes not do what's best for the country.

larus said:
democracy is failing as the general population are realising that the political class and global elite are not honest and are, in general, only concerned with their own success and power. This it across all political parties.

I actually think the political party is nearly obsolete. The use of the whip is completely undemocratic. The most able and knowledgeable should make decisions based on the common long term good. But I think for this to work a radical overhaul of our system is necessary.

Blue Valkyrie · Feb 2, 2019

https://twitter.com/J_amesp/status/1091623819478032385?s=19

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Is Democracy Obsolete?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Boing boing boing...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Yes I eat anything

Not seen such Bravery!

Share this page