democracy

Aug. 25th, 2008 09:38 am
miriam_e: from my drawing MoonGirl (Default)
[personal profile] 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.

Date: 2008-08-25 11:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] 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?

Date: 2008-08-25 12:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] 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.

Profile

miriam_e: from my drawing MoonGirl (Default)
miriam_e

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 123456
7 8 910 111213
1415 1617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 25th, 2025 12:16 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios