The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,916
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 5, 2016 10:53:23 GMT
Yes, in this instance "the people" *did* vote the wrong way.
If we are lucky, events will not prove the correctness of this assertion. However, it is depressingly possible that they will.
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 5, 2016 10:59:33 GMT
I am inclined to agree, but this is several orders of magnitude more mad than Brexit. That said, I think the past few years - the disastrous Swiss immigration referendum, the Scottish referendum that was too close for comfort, the rather hypocritical and racially charged Hungarian referendum, Brexit, and now this one (amongst countless more, the most harmless of which I can think being the New Zealand flag referendum) - have been a damning indictment of direct democracy. Indeed, it's just awful when people vote the 'wrong' way. Best do away with it! It is awful when you leave the fine details of policymaking to an electorate amongst which are numbered large numbers of people who will neither know nor care much about complex political issues such as the peace deal or Swiss immigration policy. What makes matters worse is that of the people who do care but don't know, many do not have the time, or want to put in the effort, to dislodge their initial impressions with these little, inconvenient things called 'facts'. Churchill once said that the best argument against democracy was a five-minute conversation with the average voter. It's clearly the best political system to govern with, but so-called 'direct democracy' is inferior to representative democracy, a form of government where people can identify representatives who are broadly in line with their political views and vote for them to govern. Leaving the particulars to an elected government itself is always the wisest course of action, although some governments may be tempted to shirk responsibility for major policy decisions by holding referenda. |
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 5, 2016 11:23:05 GMT
Nobody was doubting that their decision must be upheld (and an alternative deal negotiated, or warfare initiated), but respecting a decision that the voters made doesn't make it the correct one. I believe that the UK government should initiate Brexit, but that doesn't mean I think that leaving the EU is a good idea at all. I still have faith in democracy, just the right kind of democracy - direct democracy has always been a poor form of governance.
Regardless of why they lost, the wrong decision was made here. It should have been pretty obvious what the right one was from the start for those who'd bothered to research it, but this is where the trouble with referenda lies. In this case, turnout was horrifically low and no doubt most people had not read the peace deal in full. After all, they had lives of their own to be getting on with, and it wasn't worth sacrificing time that could be spent with, say, family, just to get out of their political comfort zone. It's not as if most of them had a career or particular interest in politics.
The fact that referenda have produced consistently uninformed and populist results across the globe, some of which could be extremely damaging to the countries they are held in, is proof of their general uselessness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2016 11:40:53 GMT
The fact that referenda have produced consistently uninformed and populist results across the globe, some of which could be extremely damaging to the countries they are held in, is proof of their general uselessness. Populist = what the people want Politics should in general have a strong populist element to secure legitimacy. Expert driven, technocratic politics is a cancer that slowly undermines the legitimacy of the system. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,916
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 5, 2016 11:44:49 GMT
I actually agree that most developed countries have recently seen too much alienating, elite driven technocratic "centrism".
But it is a question of balance - a political realm where lies and prejudice reign unchallenged as "the will of the people" is another sort of dystopia.
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,706
|
Post by mboy on Oct 5, 2016 11:52:57 GMT
I actually agree that most developed countries have recently seen too much alienating, elite driven technocratic "centrism". There's nothing wrong with "centrism". You and people like you would give anything right now to have our current PM ditch all her right-wing policies and instead engage in a program of "centrism". You only dislike it when your *own* party engages in centrism! I might agree that policy driven by the "elite" is a bad idea, but bear in mind that both the Columbian peace deal and the EU are "elite" goals defeated by anti-establishment forces. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,916
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 5, 2016 11:56:57 GMT
There is a reason why I had "centrism" in inverted commas - as in practice it wasn't always that "centrist" at all (in fact, often distinctly right wing)
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 5, 2016 12:34:42 GMT
Nobody was doubting that their decision must be upheld (and an alternative deal negotiated, or warfare initiated), but respecting a decision that the voters made doesn't make it the correct one. I believe that the UK government should initiate Brexit, but that doesn't mean I think that leaving the EU is a good idea at all. I still have faith in democracy, just the right kind of democracy - direct democracy has always been a poor form of governance. The fact that referenda have produced consistently uninformed and populist results across the globe, some of which could be extremely damaging to the countries they are held in, is proof of their general uselessness.Fair enough. When I said liberal democrats I didn't mean you personally nor even just people on the forum but rather in a general sense. And it's certainly true that many have called for this result to be ignored (see also, Brexit). As you say, a different course must now be taken, and I hope that a modified or new deal can be agreed that is acceptable to the populace. As for the bold bit, that's your view. Others disagree, often very strongly. That is why we have should have votes where the arguments for both sides are put forward and people come to a decision. I suppose it depends to a great extent on what one's view of government's role is. My own is that in a democracy, the role of government is to, as far as practically possible, implement the will of the people. Your second para is a core point and cannot be overstated. I see democracy as the enabling and facilitation of what the public want on all the main themes and strands of life. So I am a populist democrat. A 'trust the people' democrat. A democrat who is in denial that the 'the people' make 'wrong choices'. The other major type of 'democrat' is the more classic top down Burke position where the skilled and more intelligent trained politicians formulate policy and the populace choose between two or more sets of policies and then are occasionally consulted by focus groups and 'permitted' to verify or reject the administration in total every 5-years or so. I like the former and distrust and dislike the latter course. The latter course has worked well for those who like the general centrist left of centre consensus view. It is the reason that the populist vote has fallen in general terms since the 50s and for the opportunity afforded to UKIP. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 5, 2016 12:45:00 GMT
I actually agree that most developed countries have recently seen too much alienating, elite driven technocratic "centrism". But it is a question of balance - a political realm where lies and prejudice reign unchallenged as "the will of the people" is another sort of dystopia. Your 'lies and prejudice' may well be my 'truth and reasonable policies' leading to my 'sort of utopia'. That is the core of democracy. Why should the will of the majority be 'challenged' and if it is challenged why should that challenge prevail? there will be a lot more of this. At least I do hope so. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,916
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 6, 2016 10:26:49 GMT
Yes, he is more like Chavez than anyone else. Duterte is better compared with Chavez's (certifiably insane) successor, if anything. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 7, 2016 9:04:18 GMT
Ah, er ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Oct 7, 2016 12:51:03 GMT
I suppose we should at least award him points for trying, but still... |
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,688 
|
Post by Jack on Oct 7, 2016 13:00:07 GMT
I didn't secure peace in Colombia either, can I have a Nobel Prize too?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Oct 7, 2016 13:06:42 GMT
I didn't secure peace in Colombia either, can I have a Nobel Prize too? Well, let's see now, I doubt you'd be eligible for the peace prize, but... Did you write a profound literary work? Make a major scientific breakthrough? Discover a revolutionary new way of diagnosing and/or treating disease? Regurgitate the same old B.S. on how captalism/socialism* is great/awful*, but in a new dressing? If any of those apply, then you may be in with a chance.  * Delete where inapplicable |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 7, 2016 13:14:44 GMT
Please don't tell me that anybody here takes this ridiculous award even remotely seriously?
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by john07 on Oct 7, 2016 15:49:34 GMT
Please don't tell me that anybody here takes this ridiculous award even remotely seriously? The idea is become a total bastard creating conflict and then become slightly less of a bastard and collect your Nobel Peace Prize. See Menachem Begin, Yasser Arafat, Henry Kissinger, etc. etc. Tom Lehrer gave up writing satirical songs after the latter on the grounds that 'Political Satire became obsolete when Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize'. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,813
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 7, 2016 16:19:55 GMT
Colombia with its JokeGovernments proves, that the Europeans should have never conquered it, that "Columbus was an idiot" (deMadariaga).
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 7, 2016 18:52:31 GMT
I didn't secure peace in Colombia either, can I have a Nobel Prize too? It's a consolation prize. You won the referendum here, so you don't get one.  I appreciate this new development in international politics and look forward to a time when party bags are being distributed at G20 meetings. |
|
