FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Do we need a new system?
Do we need a new system?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago
From the land of haribos. |
I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Make it like Starship Troopers. You cannot have any kind of responsible role within government or authorities without first performing national service.
Maybe take a look at how rich countries (for their size) are run, like Denmark, Switzerland, or Saudi Arabia. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies "
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's not a case of allowing everyone to have a say. It's filtering out the wrong sort of people. Right now it's those with money and connections, perhaps forcing national service would allow only those prepared to go through hardship to seek leadership roles. It instills character and discipline. Unless people are happy for Oxbridge folk to male all the decisions and give usnour propaganda in media? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
"
This x1000
Make it a requirement to do a test before voting. Under 80% and your vote doesn’t count
Most people have no idea why or what they’re voting for
Democracy is a lie when the majority of people are too thick to understand the things they are voting on, and too easily misled by misinformation and propaganda |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
"
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
This x1000
Make it a requirement to do a test before voting. Under 80% and your vote doesn’t count
Most people have no idea why or what they’re voting for
Democracy is a lie when the majority of people are too thick to understand the things they are voting on, and too easily misled by misinformation and propaganda "
Blimey, what a view |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left? "
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
"
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it. "
That doesn’t make the referendum legally binding. In order for it to be so would have required a supermajority (which ironically would have resulted in a remain ‘win’)
Once again, we don’t live in a plebiscite, and nor should we.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it.
That doesn’t make the referendum legally binding. In order for it to be so would have required a supermajority (which ironically would have resulted in a remain ‘win’)
Once again, we don’t live in a plebiscite, and nor should we.
"
You’re making this about brexit, which was a one off.
I believe you want control and decision making at government level, enforced and controlled by the government for the good of the people.
I could be wrong but I’ve read enough of your posts to feel confident in that.
IHT post is good example of that thinking. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it.
That doesn’t make the referendum legally binding. In order for it to be so would have required a supermajority (which ironically would have resulted in a remain ‘win’)
Once again, we don’t live in a plebiscite, and nor should we.
You’re making this about brexit, which was a one off.
I believe you want control and decision making at government level, enforced and controlled by the government for the good of the people.
I could be wrong but I’ve read enough of your posts to feel confident in that.
IHT post is good example of that thinking. "
That’s the system we have now.
Would you change it for plebiscite? What would be the outcome of such? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it.
That doesn’t make the referendum legally binding. In order for it to be so would have required a supermajority (which ironically would have resulted in a remain ‘win’)
Once again, we don’t live in a plebiscite, and nor should we.
You’re making this about brexit, which was a one off.
I believe you want control and decision making at government level, enforced and controlled by the government for the good of the people.
I could be wrong but I’ve read enough of your posts to feel confident in that.
IHT post is good example of that thinking.
That’s the system we have now.
Would you change it for plebiscite? What would be the outcome of such? "
Not quite the system we have now, there is still enough wiggle room for the public to change things.
I would like a much simpler government, simple laws and flat rate taxes.
I don’t need the government telling me I need to pay for the NHS as an example, or what time I can shop and for what on a Sunday…
Not sure you would like my world  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
Government control is your answer for many things, that kind of thinking is further left than socialism, where do you sit on the left?
Representative parliament is the system we have now. Not plebiscite. (That’s why the referendum wasn’t legally binding of itself).
I don’t advocate anything beyond representative parliament, albeit I would much prefer proportional representation.
That was 1 vote, a life changing one that affects everyone and why it went to a referendum.
We don’t need government control on everything, far from it.
That doesn’t make the referendum legally binding. In order for it to be so would have required a supermajority (which ironically would have resulted in a remain ‘win’)
Once again, we don’t live in a plebiscite, and nor should we.
You’re making this about brexit, which was a one off.
I believe you want control and decision making at government level, enforced and controlled by the government for the good of the people.
I could be wrong but I’ve read enough of your posts to feel confident in that.
IHT post is good example of that thinking.
That’s the system we have now.
Would you change it for plebiscite? What would be the outcome of such?
Not quite the system we have now, there is still enough wiggle room for the public to change things.
I would like a much simpler government, simple laws and flat rate taxes.
I don’t need the government telling me I need to pay for the NHS as an example, or what time I can shop and for what on a Sunday…
Not sure you would like my world "
But that’s just policy, not a system of govt. you could achieve your goals now if a party put them in a manifesto. You can even lobby your MP or join a party and work to push those policies yourself.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm not watching a video to try grasp a vague outline. Citizens should be more fully involved in their democratic evolution, largely strategically, rather than in the management of minutea. How it's achievable, I'm unsure. It certainly seems reasonable to get more citizens voting.
What's often horrific, is the media pressure to get government to push in certain directions. As billionaire-owned media barons, who will typically pay minimal tax, aren't representative of the citizens here, I'm more concerned about media influence. As others point out, the atrocious Brexit fiasco, highlights how politics can go very wrong, affecting millions for decades.
PR may be the next good move |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
"
But proportional representation would give smaller groups "Green party" a bigger say. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
But proportional representation would give smaller groups "Green party" a bigger say. "
And if that’s what the public want then that’s what they should get.
I loathe UKIP with a passion, but when they were polling around 10-15% of the population and still getting no MP’s - it’s not representative. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The incoming Welsh system will be very interesting to watch and hopefully if it works well it may be the foot in the door that proves that a version of PR is workable and promotes good constructive governance and we might get away from the futility of FPTP and the idiotic excuse for a government we currently have |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The incoming Welsh system will be very interesting to watch and hopefully if it works well it may be the foot in the door that proves that a version of PR is workable and promotes good constructive governance and we might get away from the futility of FPTP and the idiotic excuse for a government we currently have"
It's sad in a time where you hope for a hung parliament? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The incoming Welsh system will be very interesting to watch and hopefully if it works well it may be the foot in the door that proves that a version of PR is workable and promotes good constructive governance and we might get away from the futility of FPTP and the idiotic excuse for a government we currently have
It's sad in a time where you hope for a hung parliament?"
Let’s see how it goes eh? Tbh when you look at the state we are in now I can’t quite see how it could be worse  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago
From the land of haribos. |
"Make it like Starship Troopers. You cannot have any kind of responsible role within government or authorities without first performing national service.
Maybe take a look at how rich countries (for their size) are run, like Denmark, Switzerland, or Saudi Arabia."
Yes. I also thought of those countries and especially switzerland, as they have direct democracy and it works really good to there |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies
Policies decided by the public at-large is a terrible idea. As we saw in 2016, the average person has neither the knowledge to make complicated decisions, nor the time or inclination to learn about the subject being decided upon.
This x1000
Make it a requirement to do a test before voting. Under 80% and your vote doesn’t count
Most people have no idea why or what they’re voting for
Democracy is a lie when the majority of people are too thick to understand the things they are voting on, and too easily misled by misinformation and propaganda "
I get the feeling many lefties might get disenfranchised |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I have bo problem with PR.
As I always remind this forum be careful what you wish for. As in 2015 I believe. There would have been a ukip and tory majority with I think ukip being 25% of that maybe 30%
A likely much "harsher" brexit. A much "harsher" rule to the right of the political spectrum.
It would for mean your populist parties which draw in the working class would become more popular as they are now doi g so on tbe continent.
It may actually make the government's listen more to the voting public though and actually honour manifesto committments |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Back in the days before WW1 the country was run without everyone getting a vote. Normal working people couldn't vote, only the wealthy land owners and business men.
What is laughable is that everyone here seems under the impression that their vote matters in some way. Most here wouldn't even have a vote in the past, so what makes any of you think you have even the tiniest influence on decisions when you vote for a councillor or MP?
The whole system, as it stands, is designed to atop change and to allow the wealthy and well connected to maintain their positions. Introducing a new political party won't matter as politicians can be bribed and bought to suite those that hold real influence.
You want to change the system? Destroys the established media, then the means of enforcing the current state's control over it's people. You've as good as have to have a coup or civil war to get change. Just look at what the USA was and how it is strong and independent now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was watching a very interesting video about it from richard vorbes, here it is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLDcEE3nd0
He talked about many things of why the current system and government doesnt work and I must say that I agree with him, he also mentioned how new partys wouldnt make much of a difference.
He is not saying that we should set up another party to go against the 2 party system, he is talking about a completely separate type of government, where the people should have the monopoloy on how things are run not them and to set up rules and such things too.
What do you think of that idea? I like that and isnt there already such kind of system also called direct democracy? Because with direct democracy the people decide on the policies "
I think the Raving loony party would have made things interesting, at least you knew what you were getting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
