|
Post by Clinton Cool on Nov 13, 2016 0:39:23 GMT
I seems that many respected news sources view the referendum result and election of trump not as democracy, but populism.
The point they are appearing to make is that democracy is good, but populism is bad.
Those voting for the 'populist' choice, it seems, are derided as being of low intelligence at the very least. More often, not only are they thick, but they have very poor morality.
It's a strange one really. The heart of democracy is that everyone's view is equal. Does democracy need to adapt to this modern threat? Perhaps votes cast by 'educated' people should count double? Maybe the votes of people over 70 should be discounted by 50%, at least, because they haven't got long to live with the mess they are voting for? If men over 50 were excluded from the vote that might be better for democracy because everyone knows that they have lead privileged lives, and are all now sexual deviants better known as dirty old men? Maybe the unemployed shouldn't be allowed to vote, just like prisoners, because both are a scourge to society?
Or is populism just a handy, somewhat derogotary tag to apply to the majority, by the privileged minority, in order to maintain their self perceived superiority, and the status quo?
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 13, 2016 6:28:26 GMT
If you are going to ponder the value of democracy, two phrases spring to mind. My old history teacher used to say "The problem with a democracy is that it hands the power to those most ill-equipped to deal with it."
Churchill also famously once said "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 6:55:16 GMT
Here, the democratic process lets us vote for local candidates who then go on to vote in parliament on important decisions which affect our country. We may also vote in MP's who are 'popular' rather than those who have lots of political experience.
So I don't see a conflict between populism and democracy. At the end of the day 'the people' still get some say in who is responsible for running our country.
The bigger issue is that people who want to be leaders (MP's, PM's, local councillors, lead guitarists...lol) tend not to be shy, caring, sensitive types. That's why spin doctors and 'advisors' are so important at preventing a 'leader' from it all going to their head and becoming a dictator.
The only problem with lead guitarists is that there is no opportunity for the other members of the band to debate the guitar solo once it starts. But you can pull the plug out...
|
|
|
Post by Higgs on Nov 13, 2016 7:12:14 GMT
According to a dictionary definition, populism is the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people. Used in the sense you describe, it is being used as a derogatory term by people who think they must be above ordinary. They want to claim democratic values on the basis of their belief that only they can understand how to discern the relative importance of issues, as only they think they can.
All people have different psychological builds. Intelligence doesn't separate the good from the bad. There are some very bad but intelligent people. There are some very adult people who have the emotional intelligence of a ten year old and think the world is centred around themselves. It is too much of a generalisation to lump a whole group of people with certain human frailties and another group with perfect levels of judgement.
They say that knowledge is power. There is nothing to compel any person with that power of knowledge to use it in an equitable way or for good. Now we have morality and ethics. How far does our conscience dictate how we use these relative ethics and morals. We have to live together and that requires cooperation. For the most part it works, but sometimes it needs arbitration. One way is by the ballot and you wouldn't expect everyone to accept that arbitration, but we have our conventions.
Giving people a say in their lives has been a struggle over time with those that considered themselves superior and the only ones fit for power. It still goes on. The people who spout the rationale of superiority, by whatever standard of measurement their minds conjure up are not very adaptable to ideas of their potency suddenly becoming an impotency. It's all relative and voting has a way of bringing people down to the same level or the same level of power. It cuts out the crap that could be associated with feelings of superiority or stops people from undervaluing or overvaluing their worth as humans or in society.
Equality is a hard thing to deliver on, but it is ten times harder if we have groups who consider themselves worthy of power and at the same time looking down their noses. Same old, same old. Some people live in the shit and some people create it and are afraid of losing the power to keep themselves out of the shit.
The EU, IMO, gives the creators of shit the power. It gives the few the opportunities and the majority are blamed for not seeing that as an improvement. The shit creators are more narcissist than democrat.
Well, that's my two pence worth.
|
|
|
Post by Delta9 on Nov 13, 2016 7:29:08 GMT
Direct democracy and referendums has never been a successful way of doing things. It isn't true democracy, it is tyrany of morons
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 7:35:03 GMT
Nice one Higgs.
Yes, I think that some see politics as an all in one fix for everything. As I think you suggested, what is more important is whether someone is nice or a complete arse.
Ethics and morals are sometimes seen as purely academic exercises. Personally I don't believe being a nice person is an academic process although we do learn from making mistakes. Genuine niceness seems to come from the heart and is often at odds with logic. Certainly humbleness, meekness, kindness are not often attributes associated with dictators.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 7:37:19 GMT
Direct democracy and referendums has never been a successful way of doing things. It isn't true democracy, it is tyrany of morons Isn't this forum run on a form of Direct Democracy?
|
|
|
Post by Higgs on Nov 13, 2016 7:37:35 GMT
Direct democracy and referendums has never been a successful way of doing things. It isn't true democracy, it is tyrany of morons Which way do think we should conduct ourselves if the options you mention aren't doing it for you. Is your finger hovering over the moderate button.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 13, 2016 7:41:37 GMT
Direct democracy and referendums has never been a successful way of doing things. It isn't true democracy, it is tyrany of morons Isn't this forum run on a form of Direct Democracy? no it's a benign dictatorship. It might be better to keep the boat analogy going. What the captain says goes. It's deltas boat. That's how it operates on all the boats I've sailed on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 7:45:30 GMT
Direct democracy and referendums has never been a successful way of doing things. It isn't true democracy, it is tyrany of morons Which way do think we should conduct ourselves if the options you mention aren't doing it for you. Is your finger hovering over the moderate button. I think what we have here is a nice bunch of people who are open minded, despite what they say about us on CWF . That's why we don't need moderating or need a report button.
|
|
|
Post by Delta9 on Nov 13, 2016 7:48:06 GMT
There has never been a successful direct democracy.
Now, thanks to the Brexit referendum, we have a bunch of fuckwits who don't understand what democracy is trying to tell everyone what democracy is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 7:52:54 GMT
There has never been a successful direct democracy. Now, thanks to the Brexit referendum, we have a bunch of fuckwits who don't understand what democracy is trying to tell everyone what democracy is. Delta, are you sure you're not Daniels sock puppet?
|
|
|
Post by Higgs on Nov 13, 2016 8:07:32 GMT
There has never been a successful direct democracy. Now, thanks to the Brexit referendum, we have a bunch of fuckwits who don't understand what democracy is trying to tell everyone what democracy is. We don't have a direct democracy. We elect 650 representatives to implement the value of democracy. When they can't, because of party political values not being an acceptable arbitration system for some major issues, parliament has no route of impartiality. Direct democratic voting has to be adopted. You seem to be shooting yourself in the foot with "we have a bunch of fuckwits who don't understand what democracy is trying to tell everyone what democracy is."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 8:11:42 GMT
I suppose it's also true that people can become 'popular' by saying things which appeal to the majority. Unfortunately, what really matters is what they do.
I don't hold out a lot of hope for Trump but time will tell. The exit from the EU has at least held off Europe getting it's own Trump in the future. However it's made us easier pickings for stealth dictators like Trump and Putin. I mean is May really up to the job of dealing with these type of people? On the other hand did Europe have anyone capable of holding their own against them?
Don't forget wars are usually started by dictators!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2016 8:40:38 GMT
If direct democracy and referendums always lead to disaster as some say why is Switzerland so successful?
Top Cat
|
|