Rant Democracy in the UK?

[Imgormiel]

Ok, atm I am reading up on my public affairs stuff before my exams next year. Alot of this has to do with the affairs of local and central government in a democracy. The stuff I am reading totally blows me away with what's really going on and how much apathy the voter has towards its own government.

This apathy is fundamentally undermining democracy and the reason for this being that the less you vote, the more your government has a say in what happens. Some of the stuff I've been reading is like wtf, no way should you be able to get away with that shit, but it's going on and not all of it is good.

But the question I want you guys to discuss is, do you think that because you have a democracy that your apathy contributes to what potentially could be a state run purely by administration where you don't count any more and why or why not?

Discuss away. (note this is a trend happening in democracies now for the past 60 years, so it doesn't really matter where you live, feel free to comment on it)

 

[Chronictank]

Surely the lack of voting means democracy is working?
People are choosing to not vote, not being forced not to so the power still lies with the citizens

personally i think a 0 vote is far better than a misinformed one, ask yourself this
out of your personal friends how many vote because of someone else chose a certain party.

Imo the problem is that all the major parties seem to be preaching the same thing, new labour are more concervative than they are true red so the majority power will push concervative policies.
I am not overly learned in the subject so could you elaborate a bit on how the government has more say if you dont vote?
Surely they have the same say but if less people vote then the vote of a single person counts for more of a difference in the total %, until the numbers of voters get into the regions where the votes of the political parties swing the national demographic then they dont really have all that much more say at all?

 

[Mey]

Well for a start the Uk is not a democracy anyway. It is a Representative Democracy, true democracy doesn't exist and never will, it is simply to impratical to be efficient.

 

[Raven]

The only reason Labour won at the last election was because there was nobody else worth voting for, most that dislike labour simply don't vote. I fear the next election will be a lower turn out than the last.

 

[old.Tohtori]

personally i think a 0 vote is far better than a misinformed one, ask yourself this
out of your personal friends how many vote because of someone else chose a certain party.

A thing i like to call "idols affect".

You don't vote for the one who can sing best, you vote for the one who looks, acts and looks the best, and is your friends friends friend or someone your friends friend is voting.

 

[Imgormiel]

Surely the lack of voting means democracy is working?
People are choosing to not vote, not being forced not to so the power still lies with the citizens

personally i think a 0 vote is far better than a misinformed one, ask yourself this
out of your personal friends how many vote because of someone else chose a certain party.

Imo the problem is that all the major parties seem to be preaching the same thing, new labour are more concervative than they are true red so the majority power will push concervative policies.
I am not overly learned in the subject so could you elaborate a bit on how the government has more say if you dont vote?
Surely they have the same say but if less people vote then the vote of a single person counts for more of a difference in the total %, until the numbers of voters get into the regions where the votes of the political parties swing the national demographic then they dont really have all that much more say at all?

Ah, now there lies the rub. By not voting, all you are doing is eating away at your democracy and reinforcing the assumption that government from the centre can simply eradicate it's political policy from the local government arena. It just becomes irrelevant to have a local political policy and only relevant to have a national agenda for voters - which of course we don't all take issue on this agenda as despite a lot of voter apathy, we still like to have a say in what happens in our own communities - this has been going on since year dot (democracy though was only really founded in the UK in the late 12-13th centrury) (particularly good example of local government was with the Saxons in the UK) and I cannot see this ever being replaced. But if this trend continues this then results then in an autocratic government that simply runs all local issues via administration and thus the voter has no right of issue to take with the local authorities save through an ombudsman. Which in many of cases proves to be quite futile as most local authorities partnership their own ombudsmen to sort out legal cases before they get to court.

Local government has only the mandate to operate statutory instruments that affect within the boundaries of the law, ie fines, putting up bollards in the streets, street lighting, local planning permission etc. Legislation in parliament is where central government gets to control both national and local issues which result in any political party local government being nothing more than a bunch of lobbyists for their own private bills or being nothing more than the governments concessionary poodle. Delving deeper and deeper into quangoisms that report directly to central government.

But much goes on that the electorate doesn't see, such as some 1500 legislative bills going through parliament unchallenged and taken as red because there is nothing to debate about them, or rather, they are just bullied through the house for the sake of efficiency rather than democratic issue.

This is what I oppose the most. If many of these legislative processes could be passed on to local government assemblies or authorities to do that job on a local level, as already happens with the mayoral system that we have seen so successfully implemented in London, and then the outcome approved by the government minister through a process of interaction as opposed to submission or as what is commonly known as interventionism or engagement. Then we would see a greater transparency of how our democracy is implemented.

But there's much more that we don't see going on behind the scenes than we do and it really does affect our quality of life by these somewhat clandestine goings on where government praises with one hand and with the other bullies with a club if central government is not getting its own way on local issues and local government.

 

[Access Denied]

The Queen still has the power to dissolve parliment. I admire her self control =P

 

[Imgormiel]

The Queen still has the power to dissolve parliment. I admire her self control =P

True but I think the days of Henry VIII and his chancellor Thomas Cromwell and their meddling in political affairs are long over within the royal family. Basically what you are referring to is a request from the Prime Minister who then visits old Queenie at her garden shed in London and then offers him tea, tiffin and hot cross buns and then agrees to the idea after talking a load of bollocks for an hour or so

 

[Sparx]

I still say thats why Her Majesty hasnt passed the crown over to Charles. I bet he has said he wants to dissolve the government and make the monarch powerful again.

She is waiting to give it to Prince William

 

[Imgormiel]

I still say thats why Her Majesty hasnt passed the crown over to Charles. I bet he has said he wants to dissolve the government and make the monarch powerful again.

She is waiting to give it to Prince William

Stay on topic please

Charles is an environmentalist whose interest in architecture borders on a parallel to an addiction to prOn. He couldn't manage a piss up in a brewery in comparative terms to running our economy as he spends a lot of his time sorting out issues with writs concerning his own estates financial mismanagement. That family colluded with the Nazis during WWII and the obvious public perception was made by Harry during a recent drunken party that some wanting tendencies of that pathetic government meandering style reminiscence was alluded to by his wearing of a Nazi uniform. Clever boy!

Harry goes on now to write a book on the political cleansing of his family and the eradication of it's attitude towards redundant and repugnant governments that promote ethnic cleansing

 

[Sparx]

But this is off topic

 

[Ezteq]

i don't see what's so great about democracy when the country is full of morons, i'd rather have a good old fashoned dictator!

In my day....

oh hang on this is my day, well, basically i'd rather have cholera than gordon brown but tbh most of the MPs seem the same so i just cba to vote because they all seem the same and I never know what is the real person and what is the spin, the only reason to vote (imo) is to make sure the BNP doesn't get in because some morons seem to think that they are a viable alternative and are now all respectible and stuff.

i'm not very knowledgable aout politics so don't generally talk about it but those are some opinions that have formed in my head so i thought i'd share.

 

[Imgormiel]

But this is off topic

Nowt wrong with staying on topic with a thread in off topic

 

[Imgormiel]

i don't see what's so great about democracy when the country is full of morons, i'd rather have a good old fashoned dictator!

In my day....

oh hang on this is my day, well, basically i'd rather have cholera than gordon brown but tbh most of the MPs seem the same so i just cba to vote because they all seem the same and I never know what is the real person and what is the spin, the only reason to vote (imo) is to make sure the BNP doesn't get in because some morons seem to think that they are a viable alternative and are now all respectible and stuff.

i'm not very knowledgable aout politics so don't generally talk about it but those are some opinions that have formed in my head so i thought i'd share.

That's the problem though, they want you to believe they are morons, the opposite is usually the case. Politics is an addiction and not exactly the most appealing career as more often than not it's doomed to fail.

But that said, an obsessive gets to know the political arena and it's machinations quite intricately and that's where the danger mostly lies for the population as whole :x

 

[Sparx]

Nowt wrong with staying on topic with a thread in off topic

Are you new?

 

[Imgormiel]

Are you new?

Are you ignorant?

 

[Sparx]

arrogant more like

 

[Imgormiel]

arrogant more like

Aren't we all when here, but I don't need the old. and almost 6k posts sorta says I am not new

 

[Sparx]

nah i reckon those 6k posts were done in somewhere like the strategy forums where no-one else posts just so you could farm numbers

 

[Lamp]

I think Prince Charles is a dude. Definitely my favourite royal...apart from Princess Bea, who needs a good seeing to and a few spanks on the bottom to wake her up and turn her into a dirty slut.

 

[Sparx]

you can keep her

 

[Sparx]

Double post ftw

 

[Imgormiel]

nah i reckon those 6k posts were done in somewhere like the strategy forums where no-one else posts just so you could farm numbers

Haha.....see rep...

 

[Sparx]

 

[Imgormiel]

I think Prince Charles is a dude. Definitely my favourite royal...apart from Princess Bea, who needs a good seeing to and a few spanks on the bottom to wake her up and turn her into a dirty slut.

You mean she already isn't? Lamp you disappoint me, to Bahumat's dungeon with you for some lesson's on how to treat a princess the facts of life! ;p

 

[Gorbachioo]

Why would you want everyone to vote?


The lower the turn out the better. It means those who are actually interested in politics get more power.


If it were up to me you would need some sort of qualifications to vote.(something that is available to everyone ofcourse)

 

[old.Tohtori]

Why would you want everyone to vote?


The lower the turn out the better. It means those who are actually interested in politics get more power.


If it were up to me you would need some sort of qualifications to vote.(something that is available to everyone ofcourse)

Christ you go all over the place.

On other place you say "you should vote to make a difference", now you're saying people shouldn't all vote.

Are you saying that "only some people should be allowed to vote"?

If i got your post wrong, do correct and not just post that cow...

 

[Gorbachioo]

Christ you go all over the place.

On other place you say "you should vote to make a difference", now you're saying people shouldn't all vote.

Are you saying that "only some people should be allowed to vote"?

If i got your post wrong, do correct and not just post that cow...

People who understand politics should vote. People who dont understand politics shouldnt vote.

Why is this hard to understand?

 

[Lamp]

How do you possibly guage how someone understands politics ? Understands to what extent ?

 

[Gorbachioo]

How do you possibly guage how someone understands politics ? Understands to what extent ?

I have no frigging idea.

But if we went to the moon, then surely we can develop some of way testing is someone a dumbass or not. It doesnt have to be precise. Just something, anything!

It could be something like: "Why are you voting for John McCain?"

Satisfactory answers:

- Im a rich fucker and Obama will raise my taxes

- Obama is pro choice

Unsatisfactory answers:

- Obama is a muslim

- Obama is the anti-Christ

Get it?