New kinds of governments.

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Saturday 9th June 2018
quotequote all
In the UK and the USA and many western democracies, it seems people are suffering with polarisation of the population and being forced to make choices in elections between parties that don’t really represent them. Many people are either ideologically tied to one party or just going for the least worst option all the time.

Perhaps the answer is that although democracy is the answer, modern politics are bit broken. We’ve just got career politicians focused on serving themselves and getting re-elected. Then they go to another layer of government, the House of Lords so the self serving continues. Many people are just tied to a party so simply vote for them regardless. We have democracy but there are only really two choices. It’s not really that democratic.

It’s certainly time for a shake up. Perhaps we need some new kind of government or layer of government replacing the House of Lords made up of randomly selected people based on the make up of the population. All these low probability outcomes people complain about brexit, trump, Corbyn etc are the results of governments being disconected from the population. Maybe the population themselves should be more directly involved in policy and decisions?

True democracy needs the population to be more empowered and involved in descision making, the ancient Greeks who started democracy knew this and used sortition as a part of the political process.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition..

Should people be more involved in descisions like in a jury or are people stupid and we should just have political parties making decisions on our behalf?






anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Saturday 9th June 2018
quotequote all
irocfan said:
I don't often agree with ken L but as he put it (to paraphrase) "voting doesn't change anything, if it did they'd ban it"
hehe

I think there are big changes coming to how countries govern and organise themselves.

Increasing automation and connectivity will probably lead to new kinds of economies. Kids in different countries are growing up with the same influences through Netflix and amazon and YouTube. They don’t have the same notions of nation and country that their parents have. They often see themselves as global citizens and aren’t defined by where they happen to have been born.

The whole concept of nationality seems odd when you think about it. That somehow where you’re born might define your world view and chances in life and connections with other people.


anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Sunday 10th June 2018
quotequote all
Whole heartedly agree with the sentiment and idea, a government for the people by the people - what happened?

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Sunday 10th June 2018
quotequote all
grumbledoak said:
Political parties, centralization, and corruption, mostly. Ironically one of the successes has been the House of Lords, which was created intentionally to not represent the people at all, but has proved partially immune to the weaknesses of the Commons.
You think the HOL is a success?

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Monday 11th June 2018
quotequote all
That’s great dubster.

Like China’s social rating system but instead of the government rating the people we rate them.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Pothole said:
El stovey said:
Various thought provoking stuff...Should people be more involved in descisions like in a jury or are people stupid and we should just have political parties making decisions on our behalf?
That was pretty good until your final non-sentence.

What do you actually suggest to replace the House of Lords?
As usual said in the opening post sortition, would be a good alternative to the House of Lords.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Part of the problem with changing democracy is that people actually like to identify with political parties and political ideologies.

Following a party is like following a football team or a religion etc, it gives people a tribal sense of belonging and feeling part of something, like when we were part of a tribe in Africa hunting together and cooperating in order to survive.

The problem now is that people ideologically attached to parties are feeling let down as their party adopts positions they disagree with over brexit or trump or whatever and how they view the parties traditional ideology.

Threads on here are full of disgruntled people saying “I’ve always voted x but now I’m not going to vote for them over brexit (or whatever) but I can’t ever vote Y”

It seems crazy really. Why not just look at each party as the election approaches and decide then? Parties are always floating around and adopting different positions if you’re slavishly attached to one, you’re bound to get let down at some point.


anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
AstonZagato said:
Not sure I completely agree. There is an element of tribalism but it is more the fact that no party is espousing my views right now. No party is offering competent leadership.
Sure AstonZagato but you like me aren’t obviously tied to a party.

I feel disenfranchised for the same reasons as you.

Other people though who are tied to parties feel more let down as their team has changed or moved away from what the voter thinks the party’s values should be.

I vote for whichever party I think will do the best job. Whereas on here I often hear people say things like “I’d never vote x” or “I’m a lifelong y voter” indicating that the party they always vote for gives them something more than a political part gives me or you.