Moderators: richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:25 am

So I have been watching, (from afar), the Australian federal election campaign play out. That, and the US elections have shaken my belief in democracy a little. On the basis of:

Electioneering campaigning seems to occupy more politician time than actually getting stuff done
Campaigning is generally negative, so voters are choosing what they dont want, as opposed to what they want
The amount of money invested in spin means that even the positive messages are distorted
Voter turnout is generally low, (below 50%)

Once you combine all of these factors and the uncertainty around it, I am quite doubtful that the eventual selected party is reflective of the will of the electorate, or alligned with the needs of the country.

Additionally, the costs around election campaigns are staggering. Not to mention the cost of rolling back policy as goverments change. It all seems so wasteful

So here is my proposal

Create a single ruling party, with various portfolio and electorate ministers sitting underneath

Have an online "election" annually. This election lists between 30-40 key elements of government, eg:

Education
Economy
Fiscal Management
Health
Foreign Relations
Defence
Race Relations
etc etc

Each citizen is asked 2 questions against each element. Rate out of 10, a) How important is this to you? and b) how would you rate the goverments performance?

The results are published in full each election

If there is a change in the populations belief of what is important, resources could be reallocated. If there is a continued poor performance rating, ministers in charge can be sacked.

Of course the weakness here, as with any dictatorship, is the accountability. If corrupt enough, results could be manipulated, and eventually not published at all.

But perhaps this could be handled constitutionally.

Anyway, who wants to try it?

[Edited 2013-08-05 20:28:48]
 
sccutler
Posts: 5841
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:35 am

Perhaps they could create a Five Year Plan for the issues of greatest concern?

Best of all, the government could demand - declare - what would happen, and it would just... happen!
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
AyostoLeon
Posts: 745
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 3:09 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:09 am

Funny that you should mention online questions to determine outcomes. I went to the Australian ABC's interactive poll which asks a number of topical, quetions, including car industry support, asylum seekers,, education funding, etc. When I answered the last question a box apperared, "A technical difficulty is preventing your reply being processed. " Ah well,, back to the drawing board.

In Australia attendance at a polling station is compulsory so a low turn out isn't a problem. All the same there is a lot of disatisfaction with politicians who are seen to be primarily concerned with power for its own sake rather than doing something positive for the country.

I am not convinced that a one party state is the solution as parties tend to become bogged down by dogma and those who deviate are not tolerated. It would eliminate costly election campaigns but increase the power of the central governement and its apparatchiks over the population.

Perhaps some more minor electoral reforms could be introduced.
First, restrict membership of political parties and donors to real, live, breathing human beings.
Second, only citizens may donate to a political party with all foreign donations being banned.
Third, end the practice of rewarding parties with tax payers money based on the number of votes received. The current arrangement favours the major parties and encourages a two party system.

In Australia the Electoral Commission sends out explanatory notes to each elector once the writs for an election have been issued. A possible way of reducing unneccessary expense and duplication of political advertising could be to have a manifesto or general statement from each candidate in the constituency being enclosed. This would benefit minor parties or independents who currently lack the support of big business and/ or unions go fund exspensive media campaigns.
The person with no dignity eats his dinner twice
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:11 am

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
My Democratic Dictatorship

I think the term you're going for is "single-party state". A dictatorship, by definition, governs without the majority consent of its citizens.

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Have an online "election" annually. This election lists between 30-40 key elements of government, eg:

Education
Economy
Fiscal Management
Health
Foreign Relations
Defence
Race Relations
etc etc

Each citizen is asked 2 questions against each element. Rate out of 10, a) How important is this to you? and b) how would you rate the goverments performance?

The results are published in full each election

If there is a change in the populations belief of what is important, resources could be reallocated. If there is a continued poor performance rating, ministers in charge can be sacked.

You've just described China.

Eric X. Li: A tale of two political systems

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Voter turnout is generally low, (below 50%)


Doesn't Australia have turnouts well north of 90% due to compulsory voting? I'm quite a fan of that system.

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
But perhaps this could be handled constitutionally.
Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Anyway, who wants to try it?

Not in the US. I know many Americans who will defend to the death to keep that 224-year old document unchanged. But I wouldn't mind giving it a shot. I'm getting pretty sick of the constant smear campaigns...and we don't even have an election coming up   
Flying refined.
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 7951
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:19 am

Quoting sccutler (Reply 1):
Perhaps they could create a Five Year Plan for the issues of greatest concern?


Whose greatest concerns?

Quoting sccutler (Reply 1):
Best of all, the government could demand - declare - what would happen, and it would just... happen!


And, exactly why would you want that? Because, a centralized government always knows what's best?

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Create a single ruling party,


Why don't we just elevate someone to king and let him rule through his council?

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Of course the weakness here, as with any dictatorship, is the accountability.


Yup, there is no way to avoid that. To use an over-used cliche': "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts, absolutely".

Look, I may the only one in the whole darned country that feels this way, but I believe that our (here in the US) political system is working the way it was envisioned to work. The majority can not dictate to the minority. No one person (a president) is too powerful. The opposition party can block the party in power, within the rules established.

The whole process is designed to move slowly...almost lumberous in its movement unless all (or the vast most) are in agreement. So, that stupid crap like the PPACA doesn't get passed. Of course, in that case, the process didn't work as well as I would have liked it to, but c'est la vie.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Unless it's expressly prohibited, it's allowed.
You are not entitled to a public safe space.
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:29 am

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 3):
You've just described China.

I dont think they canvas opinion from it;s citizens? Only the legislative assembly

I live in China, (kind of), and its certainly not perfect. But there are a lot of things going for it. There is a lot of negative press on human rights. However, in truth, it's population are generally a very proud bunch of people with a strong sense of culture and lifestyle.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 1):
Perhaps they could create a Five Year Plan for the issues of greatest concern?

They could even link a whole series of 5 year plans to a 50 year plan.....again, much like China
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:53 am

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 2):
First, restrict membership of political parties and donors to real, live, breathing human beings.

What's to stop corporations from giving their executives additional "bonuses" with which to donate under the guise of an individual?

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 2):
Second, only citizens may donate to a political party with all foreign donations being banned.

  

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 4):
Look, I may the only one in the whole darned country that feels this way, but I believe that our (here in the US) political system is working the way it was envisioned to work.

You probably aren't the only one that feels that way, but probably not for the reason you think. The problem with a two-party system is that it radicalizes itself. I don't even really need to back that statement up with specific examples, just look at how cooperation is almost non-existent between the Dems and the GOP these days. As a means to pander to their respective side, parties will move further and further away from center (or whatever is opposite of their opponent's viewpoint).

Quoting kiwiinoz (Reply 5):
I dont think they canvas opinion from it;s citizens?

You didn't watch the TED Talk I linked. I know it's 20-minutes long, but it's worth it, I promise  
Flying refined.
 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:07 am

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 6):
You didn't watch the TED Talk I linked. I know it's 20-minutes long, but it's worth it, I promise

Will have a look later. Thanks

The corruptability issue is significant when considering this model. Probably the single party/dictatorship state with the best system to restrict corruption is China, and they certainly have not been successful in cleaning it all up.

Outside of China I cant think of any nation that is even close to being clean

But it exists within democracies also
 
AyostoLeon
Posts: 745
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 3:09 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:54 am

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 6):

If a corporation wished to pay a "bonus" the executive would need to declare it and pay income tax on it in the normal manner. Would the Corporation wish to pay twice as much simply to ensure a donation of the desired amount was paid? In Australia, under electoral and political funding legislation, parties must declare individual donations over a certain amount. I am sure that the tax office would notice a donation from an individual whose declared income was less than an amount that could reasonably support such a donation.

[Edited 2013-08-06 00:03:02]
The person with no dignity eats his dinner twice
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:44 am

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
Electioneering campaigning seems to occupy more politician time than actually getting stuff done
Campaigning is generally negative, so voters are choosing what they dont want, as opposed to what they want
The amount of money invested in spin means that even the positive messages are distorted
Voter turnout is generally low, (below 50%)

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "democracy is the messiest form of government invented, but it is better than all the rest". Despite the problems supporting and maintaining a democratic form of government, I still think it's the best way.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 8122
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:28 pm

Instead of a single party state, why not change the FPTP system that we have (where voters might be more tempted to vote against a candidate rather than for one) and go to the Instant Runoff system with a "none of the above" box? Only the candidate that gets 50% or more is dutifully elected. Gives space for as many candidates as possible to enter, all would have a clear shot and as long as there's not a winner, keep polling each week. Candidates would instead focus on the positive things instead of a smear campaign.

And eliminate PACs and corporation donations. All donations are capped to no more than $10,000 per citizen per election cycle, to a maximum of $100K for life. And no transferring money in another's name. A baby writing a $10,000 check? Yeah right.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
romeobravo
Posts: 1440
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:37 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 2:21 pm

What we need is less mob rule, not more. To be perfectly blunt the population is too stupid to make such important decisions, not that you need a big government to run an economy anyway.

We need to restrict the things that can be voted on. People voting with their wallet can take care of most things.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8440
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:28 pm

Quoting kiwiinoz (Thread starter):
My Democratic Dictatorship  

To a great extent, that is exactly what we have today. I.e., majority rule.

Now, given the diversity of people's opinion, how can we expect such a system to ever work? Even within the voters belonging to that majority in power, you can expect extensive compromising and unhappiness, or else you risk never getting that additional 1% to throw you over the 50% threshold necessary to be in power.

If you want to give it a better chance to work, you would decentralize power to a great extent. That way, people can vote with their feet and move to areas where they share more in common with their neighbors. Of course, that goes against a lot of people's belief, and that's part of the sad problem - far too many people focused on attaining power for themselves either directly or indirectly, rather than restricting it for everybody.

Power corrupts, right? It's not just the government, because they are a reflection of the voters - we are a corrupted people.

[Edited 2013-08-06 09:29:31]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 8122
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:27 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 12):
To a great extent, that is exactly what we have today. I.e., majority rule.

Hmm...depends on the country and the situation. Majority rule can be defined as either the most votes or absolute majority (50%+).

CGP Grey does an amazing series explaining this in detail:
http://www.cgpgrey.com/politics-in-the-animal-kingdom

In short: if you have 6 candidates and the highest one got 25% of the votes, should that candidate be declared the winner even though 75% of voters didn't want him?

In fact, take a look at the US House. How is it possible that Democrats, overall, got more votes than Republicans, yet the balance of power remains unchanged?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21779
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:21 pm

Here's an idea: a democratic aristocracy.

An aristocracy is where the governing class is specially trained and groomed in governance. Of course, aristocracies also tend to be hereditary so there is no democracy.

But consider the following set-up:
1) All schools are federally funded at the same level per student (adjusted for local property and operating costs). There are no private schools, so the aristocracy's kids get the same education as anyone else. This ensures that all citizens have equal opportunity (educational inequality is one of the fundamental roots to overall inequality).

2) After (or during) university, students may choose to go to Governance School (much as how students now may choose Law or Medical School). Governance School will feature a curriculum that covers such subjects as economics, constitutional law, urban planning, etc. etc. etc. At the end there will be a licensing examination.

3) Only licensed "Governors" (or whatever you call the graduates) may run for public office. While in public office, there are certain behaviors that can have them barred for life from the career of governance (much as there are behaviors that can bar a physician from practicing medicine for life or a lawyer from practicing law for life). Such examples would be championing or passing blatantly unconstitutional legislation, promoting blatantly false ideas (scientific denialism, economic denialism, etc.) to forward an agenda, and ethics violations.

Why do I like this? Frankly, we have too many stupid yokels in office. They can give a good speech and dress in a nice suit. Do you know what education Jan Brewer has? High school. And she was trained as a radiation technologist without ever having practiced. I'm sorry, but running a state is something that should require more than a high school education. My regulations would have also dis-governened (dis-barred?) those GOP politicians from North Carolina who wanted to establish Christianity as the state religion. It would stop idiotic "debates" on non-debates like global warming and evolution and certainly anyone claiming that rape doesn't cause pregnancy would find themselves losing their careers.

Running a government is a highly technical and complicated activity. Just like law or medicine, you should REQUIRE an appropriate education of anyone engaged in this career.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:02 pm

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 8):
Would the Corporation wish to pay twice as much simply to ensure a donation of the desired amount was paid?

That's assuming the tax rate is that high...but yes, I still predict that some corporations who have a vested interest in political maneuvering will pay the premium to filter a donation through one (or more) of their executives. It will surely cut down on the problem, but the worst offenders will not be defeated so easily.

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 8):
In Australia, under electoral and political funding legislation, parties must declare individual donations over a certain amount. I am sure that the tax office would notice a donation from an individual whose declared income was less than an amount that could reasonably support such a donation.

Well declared year-end income includes bonuses in most places, does it not? Tax forms will simply show some nice bonuses to the executive, which isn't at all unheard of among the Fortune 500.

As for what constitutes a reasonable donation, there's no way that can be legislated. Investigations would be completely speculative. Look at the super-wealthy who donate their personal funds to PACs. Not all of them are doing so for business interests, so it just goes to show how fervent people can be about their political ideals. But to resolve this problem I would have no problem in capping individual donations.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
1) All schools are federally funded at the same level per student (adjusted for local property and operating costs). There are no private schools, so the aristocracy's kids get the same education as anyone else. This ensures that all citizens have equal opportunity (educational inequality is one of the fundamental roots to overall inequality).

Slow down there, Commie Joe  

Joking aside, the inequality you're combating is really a symptom of an abysmal public education system, irrespective of private schooling. You can get rid of private schools and very well still have awful public education. If you raise the quality of public education, people can still have their private schools and inequality will not be so much a concern.

But while we're at it, I'm not fan of home-schooling and religiously denominated schools. I think we (and our tax dollars) can all do without those.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
2) After (or during) university, students may choose to go to Governance School (much as how students now may choose Law or Medical School). Governance School will feature a curriculum that covers such subjects as economics, constitutional law, urban planning, etc. etc. etc. At the end there will be a licensing examination.

How is this Governance School funded? By the state? By the students?

Furthermore, would experienced professionals have to go back to school in their fifties or sixties simply because they want to run for office?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
3) Only licensed "Governors" (or whatever you call the graduates) may run for public office. While in public office, there are certain behaviors that can have them barred for life from the career of governance (much as there are behaviors that can bar a physician from practicing medicine for life or a lawyer from practicing law for life). Such examples would be championing or passing blatantly unconstitutional legislation, promoting blatantly false ideas (scientific denialism, economic denialism, etc.) to forward an agenda, and ethics violations.

Not the worst idea...but as far banning politicians for championing or promoting unpopular ideas, that appears to trample all over free speech rights, which politicians are also protected by. Who would be responsible for deciding what is or isn't an offense in contravention of these laws? Under the inefficient two-party system the US currently has, I can't imagine any government body that would be completely unbiased in this very serious decision. .
Flying refined.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21779
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:22 pm

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
Joking aside, the inequality you're combating is really a symptom of an abysmal public education system, irrespective of private schooling. You can get rid of private schools and very well still have awful public education. If you raise the quality of public education, people can still have their private schools and inequality will not be so much a concern.

As long as the politicians don't have to have their kids educated in public schools, they need not care how good public schools are. Our leaders should have the same skin in the game that we little people do. The same should be true of healthcare and the proof is in the pudding: as "Communist" as government healthcare was portrayed by the "Tea Party," most of the "Tea Party" politicians immediately signed up for government healthcare as soon as they got to Congress. Again, if it's good enough for the people, then it's good enough for our leaders.

Eliminates the "I got mine" attitude.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
Not the worst idea...but as far banning politicians for championing or promoting unpopular ideas, that appears to trample all over free speech rights, which politicians are also protected by.

Not at all. If you want to repeal the First Amendment, then you can champion that. But you have to do it by REPEALING THE FIRST AMENDMENT, not by passing laws that contravene the First Amendment.

That's been the issue in this country. Blatantly unconstitutional LAWS have been passed. The point is that you should be able to champion whatever cause you like, as long as you proceed legally and constitutionally. You want to establish a state religion? Fine. Then start a campaign to repeal the First Amendment. But if you try to pass a law establishing a state religion, that should cost you your career because you are engaging in futile legislation AND wasting public resources on the subsequent court case.

Also, it would only apply to BLATANT cases and be tried by a peer jury, not to ambiguous cases.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8440
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:40 pm

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 13):

There's some benefits to runoff elections, but it's relatively minor. It would somewhat discourage, but IMO not prevent, a two-party system.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
There are no private schools, so the aristocracy's kids get the same education as anyone else. This ensures that all citizens have equal opportunity (educational inequality is one of the fundamental roots to overall inequality).

Let's scuttle what is left of education freedom. We haven't destroyed it enough, that's why our system sucks. *shakes head*

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
Only licensed "Governors" (or whatever you call the graduates) may run for public office.

Only those people anointed (i.e., licensed) by the government may hold power? Yikes! We need an urgent history lesson here.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
Such examples would be championing or passing blatantly unconstitutional legislation, promoting blatantly false ideas (scientific denialism, economic denialism, etc.) to forward an agenda, and ethics violations.

Banning ignorance is unachievable.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
Do you know what education Jan Brewer has? High school.

So? I know people with high school degrees that are smarter than some college educated ones.

[Edited 2013-08-06 14:42:04]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21779
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:52 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Let's scuttle what is left of education freedom.

Education is the source of freedom, not vice-versa.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):

Only those people anointed (i.e., licensed) by the government may hold power? Yikes! We need an urgent history lesson here.

That's how it works for cops, lawyers, doctors, pilots, etc. etc. etc. Why not political leaders?

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Banning ignorance is unachievable

But a worthy goal. By that argument, we might as well not license pilots either because, as we've seen with KE and WN, even with the licensing some of them still mess up.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
So? I know people with high school degrees that are smarter than some college educated ones.

Good. Let them practice medicine then. Or law. Or do anything else that requires education.

See, education isn't about teaching people to be smart. You're born smart or dumb, basically. Education is about teaching people what they can do with those smarts. Simply being smart isn't enough to fly a plane, write a legal case, do a heart transplant, or run a country. Albert Einstein would have had no idea how to do a heart transplant. You also need to be educated.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
romeobravo
Posts: 1440
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:37 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:17 am

All schools should be private. Give people school vouchers if necessary.

Education inequality doesn't really matter. If a rich kid is dumber because Mummy and Daddy didn't send him to Eton, that isn't going to help the poor kids.

It's better that parents invest their wealth in their kids than splurging it on whatever vice.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5841
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:08 am

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 4):

Whose greatest concerns?
Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 4):

And, exactly why would you want that? Because, a centralized government always knows what's best?

Sorry, I was unclear; I was mocking the entire idea. "5-year plans" and the like were the norm in the Soviet Union. They never worked.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 11):
What we need is less mob rule, not more. To be perfectly blunt the population is too stupid to make such important decisions, not that you need a big government to run an economy anyway.

That was the whole idea behind having the Senate elected by the state legislatures, creating a soundly legitimate link between the people and their Senate; sadly, no longer so. Biggest mistake in our governance history.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 14):
1) All schools are federally funded at the same level per student (adjusted for local property and operating costs). There are no private schools, so the aristocracy's kids get the same education as anyone else. This ensures that all citizens have equal opportunity (educational inequality is one of the fundamental roots to overall inequality).

Bah; federal. The idea that a centralized national government could be meaningfully effective or responsive in administering education is precious, but hardly rational.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:22 am

Quoting sccutler (Reply 20):
Sorry, I was unclear; I was mocking the entire idea. "5-year plans" and the like were the norm in the Soviet Union. They never worked.

They work in China
 
PhilBy
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:44 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 5:59 am

I think the goal here is to ban all political parties. Each representative must be independent. Emulate the French system where they need to obtain a certain number of signatures to stand.
All political donations to go to a central fund to be evenly divided between the standing candidates.

If we then introduce a system (now possible with modern technology) where all laws must pass a referendum before being enacted we might even be able to create a democracy! At the moment I don't know of any country currently that is an actual democracy. 
 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:32 am

Quoting PhilBy (Reply 22):
If we then introduce a system (now possible with modern technology) where all laws must pass a referendum before being enacted we might even be able to create a democracy!

This could be impractical. There are many laws that are so detailed, (tax law, etc) that the public will not have the capacity to vote on
 
PhilBy
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:44 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:46 am

Quoting kiwiinoz (Reply 23):
This could be impractical. There are many laws that are so detailed, (tax law, etc) that the public will not have the capacity to vote on

Do many of our politicians who do vote on the tax laws really understand them? Probably not - they just pay an accountant to explain them when necessary.

But, given that we are expected to know all relevant laws of our respective countries (and any that we visit) so as not to infringe them, this might well lead to a much simpler set of laws that can be understood by the 'layman'. Simply reject any law that is so complicated that no-one can understand it.

One common phrase is "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". I've spent hours reading some of the legal texts and there is no way that any reasonable person can have a complete knowledge. Even lawyers spend most of their time poring through reference books etc.
 
Cerecl
Posts: 613
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:22 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:41 am

The benefit of an authoritarian regime is that 1. The government can implement schemes that are beneficial for the whole country without having to appease NIMBYs. 2. There is no 3 year election cycle so the government can take a long term view instead of the next 6 months. 3. The government can truly lead the country rather than being held to ransom over issues that really isn't a big deal but was made to be a big deal by media/special interest groups. Like it or not a large proportion of the population is gullible and easily influenced. See the asylum seeker debate in Australia for an example.
The problems of such a regime is obvious as well. No need to go over them again.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 20):
I was mocking the entire idea. "5-year plans" and the like were the norm in the Soviet Union. They never worked.

it works very well in China.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16):
As long as the politicians don't have to have their kids educated in public schools, they need not care how good public schools are.

There are public schools and then there are public schools. They are not all the same. The school I went to was a public one just like the 500 other schools in the city. It happens to be one of the top ones, and guess what? It is rolling in cash having received large sum donations from philanthropists. Since I left it has a new state of the art gym and several new buildings. Unsurprisingly it continues to attract top calibre teachers and students. A large number of students who did not reach the entry standard are willing to pay any sum to get in yet the school rejects most of them because it wants to maintain the quality of its intake and ultimately its very high university entrance exam record, and frankly, it doesn't need the money anyway. It is not as simple as public vs private.


[Edited 2013-08-07 19:46:22]
Fokker-100 SAAB 340 Q400 E190 717 737 738 763ER 787-8 772 77E 773 77W 747-400 747-400ER A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A346 A359 A380
 
kiwiinoz
Topic Author
Posts: 2000
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:57 am

Quoting PhilBy (Reply 24):
Do many of our politicians who do vote on the tax laws really understand them? Probably not - they just pay an accountant to explain them when necessary.

Exactly. And under a more dictatorial model, the politicians without the expertise will also not be called on to vote. Only the small group of policy makers that are experrts in the field will be called on to implement tax policy
 
Derico
Posts: 4390
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:18 pm

The west is broken, at the end of it's life cycle. It's institutions have eroded and rotten, it has made many enemies around the world, and it is running out of money (to finance lavish social welfare states or imperialistic militaries).

Everything comes to an end, just a fact of life.
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8440
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: My Democratic Dictatorship

Fri Aug 09, 2013 1:10 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Let's scuttle what is left of education freedom.

Education is the source of freedom, not vice-versa.

I was referring to having the freedom to teach in different ways. If you want to set up a copy of a Japanese high school in Brazil for example, including an identical curriculum, it would be illegal. If that isn't absurd enough, consider the detrimental effects of stalling experimentation and development in new and creative ways to teach kids.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):

Only those people anointed (i.e., licensed) by the government may hold power? Yikes! We need an urgent history lesson here.

That's how it works for cops, lawyers, doctors, pilots, etc. etc. etc. Why not political leaders?

Doctors and lawyers require very specific training, a manager does not.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Banning ignorance is unachievable

But a worthy goal. By that argument, we might as well not license pilots either because, as we've seen with KE and WN, even with the licensing some of them still mess up.

Everybody is ignorant of most things in life. You can't be an expert in everything.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
See, education isn't about teaching people to be smart. You're born smart or dumb, basically. Education is about teaching people what they can do with those smarts. Simply being smart isn't enough to fly a plane, write a legal case, do a heart transplant, or run a country. Albert Einstein would have had no idea how to do a heart transplant. You also need to be educated.

You don't need a degree to know right from wrong. Bin Laden was an engineer and apparently an intelligent man, yet not a good man. Former Brazilian President Lula really didn't do much in terms of education for himself at all, yet he learned through his experiences not to implement Cuban-style socialism when he got elected, which was pretty much his rhetoric prior to that.

And frankly, better Lula than some guy stuck for the past 20-30 years in academia and/or government service, with no clue or experience in the real world.

[Edited 2013-08-08 18:12:28]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, casinterest, flybaurlax, N583JB, scbriml and 51 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos