democracy

[miriam_e]

I've been thinking about why democracy doesn't seem to work the way we all feel it should. It occurred to me that one of the central obstacles is the fact that we are usually given an impossible choice at election time: vote for one of two liars.

In Australia this approach is very clearly wrong. It is well known that in Australia we tend to vote governments out not in. Yet each time a new government gets power it believes its own bullshit and says that it won and that it now has a mandate to bring in certain changes. In Australia this is a big mistake. Generally we have actually voted a government out and the new government is there only because they didn't lose as badly.

So how can this be fixed? If we have another choice on voting forms, "None of the above", then we can ensure that we don't have to vote a liar in accidentally. It means that they can just keep holding elections till a candidate is found who genuinely reflects what the people want. Yes this would be incredibly expensive (especially in USA, where the cost of elections has spiralled way beyond sane limits) but that would help correct the process that currently selects self-serving corrupt liars. Investing billions on a pair of "opposing" easily manipulated morons would be less likely if people could simply say "no".

At the moment in Australia, where voting is compulsory, we have the "donkey" vote or the "informal" vote where people can attempt to display their disgust at the candidates, but these end up being simply discarded. We have no genuine way to have our contempt for bad candidates to be recorded. In the USA it is even worse. People think they can protest by simply not voting, but that doesn't work either, as Reagan's "landslide victory" where he was elected by only 27% of the population shows.

We need true democracy, not a choice between which liar will screw us over.

Additional: I've become unsure of my "27%" figure. I keep thinking it was less, like 12%... but I have big problems remembering numbers. I searched on the net to try and find out what it was, but the truth has been so distorted by the politicians all I can find are figures on the way the votes split, with feverish babble about what a great victory it was, ignoring that it was really a new low point, with so few people voting. Reagan was elected by a pitiful minority and I think it has been the case for every election since, made worse in recent years by the theft of what few votes were actually cast.

Comments

[drjon.livejournal.com]

I forget where I read it, but someone suggested you get two votes: one for someone, and another against someone, which is also a cute idea.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

That's kind of neat too. It feels like it would let the process be more fine-tuned. Unfortunately it would possibly also mean we would end up with exactly what we already have -- the liar who is hated the least. We actually need a vote of no confidence in the choice. Perhaps the vote against could be used to that end, but politicians are so sneaky I bet it would be used to select the one who lost the least as if they were a winner. And we would all lose again.

[drjon.livejournal.com]

And we would all lose again.

Well it *is* politics!

[faemortel.livejournal.com]

Off topic I *SHOULD* be in melbourne the begining of febuary.
AND I have a new phone number, 206 383 5299 *hugs*

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Oh heavens! Early February! I'll try to get there, but not sure I can do it then. If I don't make it then I'll try to send you another ticket sometime in the future and catch you then.

[thinarthur.livejournal.com]

This situation was neatly satirised by Douglas Adams in one of the later Hitcher books, where a planet elected one of either disinterested and callous alien lizards as ruler. When questioned about why they bothered voting they said "if we don't the wrong lizard might get in".

My main problem is not so much lying politicians but ones that actually do carry out their promises, which tend to be detrimental to my sense of decency, the nation, my lifestyle and frequently all three. Another problem is actually finding someone to support, as any policy I do favour is usually matched by two I can't abide. There is also a frequent lack of real debate on any issue, most of the hot air talked is over minor quibbles.

If we can take for example the many enviromental issues on the table at the moment (Murray Water, Greenhouse Gas production, farmland erosion, etc) consideration of sustainable population level is fundamental but until the last month that factor has been ignored or belittled by both politicians and the media.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Looks like it's time for me to re-read them. I don't remember that particular bit. Douglas Adams is the greatest.

I certainly agree with all you say. It appalls me that I recently heard politicians still arguing that we need more growth, and more people in order to sustain that growth. These clots are so damn out of touch with reality it is a wonder that they manage to draw breath. They acknowledge (belatedly) our water problems, but want more steam engines (coal and nuclear power stations) to boil the water away at utterly unsustainable rates. They know we are destroying the biosphere that supports us, but want to accelerate it.

Whatever happened to "living within our means"? We are surrounded by energy, here for the tapping. We are a rich enough nation that we can afford a high standard of living for all using a tiny fraction of the resources we currently trash.

My sister and I put in a solar-powered water pump recently. This house is now free of centralised supply for water. We set up the house to use low pressure water. The plumber assured us it wouldn't work, but it does. Using low pressure means it doesn't waste as much water and doesn't stress the pipes as badly.

Next I will replace all my lighting with low voltage LED lights with a solar panel charging a battery. The LEDs will last at least 10 years, probably more. The battery is the weak and toxic link in the chain, but hopefully future improvements will take care of that.

I had hoped to design and build a low energy computer this year, but for various reasons that has been put off, probably till next year.

Soon I will be able to run this place almost entirely on low energy. Not only will it use less than before, but I expect it will be safer and more reliable than the centralised high energy systems that we are constantly told we need.

[thinarthur.livejournal.com]

The trouble is, you could do all that and make a small saving but when the govt has a policy to increase population by a third of a million people every year on top of natural increase, do you really think it will do any good?

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Well... it will help me. The price of power will only go up. When I am off the grid it won't affect me.

As more people do the same then the politicians will (hopefully) become more and more irrelevant.

I have this persistent dream of a bunch of politicians holding a parade and finding that they are the only ones there. Only used-car salesmen are distrusted more than politicians in Australia. They are right down there at the bottom of the heap. I fervently hope that eventually people will realise that we just don't need them. They are making themselves redundant. At the moment their only saving grace is that they have enough power to hold the slavering big corporations in check, but the minute politicians cease to do that, their only remaining use vanishes.