Would You Vote For A British Republic?

[horribleblob]

2 hours ago, hackey lad said:

In your post  number 11 your fine with it . Now you say it needs to change . As I said before, you are conflicted 

Eh! m williamson didn't say that at all.

1 hour ago, m williamson said:

Where did I say that I was fine with it? I didn't, read it again. What I said was that I could assure all of you who can see no problem with our current system that you have nothing to worry about because I can't see it changing. That's not saying I'm fine with it, I said it was unfit for purpose and we have a pretend democracy rather than a true democracy. Acknowledging that other people disagree is simply accepting the way things are, not being fine with it. Parliament is sovereign in this country not the people, so they get to dictate how things are.

 

When it comes to comprehension you struggle a bit don't you?

m williamson, your post was clear.

[hackey lad]

7 minutes ago, horribleblob said:

Eh! m williamson didn't say that at all.

m williamson, your post was clear.

Soz 

[m williamson]

1 hour ago, horribleblob said:

Eh! m williamson didn't say that at all.

m williamson, your post was clear.

Thanks for that. When you get to my age you do begin to wonder if you remember it correctly.

1 hour ago, hackey lad said:

Soz 

Don't worry about it, I do tend to be a little verbose from time to time and that can confuse rather than enlighten. No problem.

[hackey lad]

1 hour ago, m williamson said:

Thanks for that. When you get to my age you do begin to wonder if you remember it correctly.

Don't worry about it, I do tend to be a little verbose from time to time and that can confuse rather than enlighten. No problem.

Verbose . Good word 

[*_ash_*]

17 hours ago, crookesey said:

Bring it on, the right time is now, I would vote tommorow irrespective of totally irrelevant fears.

But if the vote didn't go your way (whichever it is), you, or these people will just claim it's not fair vote, or papers swayed votes.

 

-

 

On another note I saw a post mentioning 'true democracy'

 

It's all the same thing. democracy is crap when the things aren't to your liking. 

 

Maybe a true democracy would be where everyone votes on everything, and government doesn't exist?

 

I couldn't it lasting as not enough people understand how money works and is spent. It would almost certainly end up with everyone voting to get all the money from the rich and give it to the poor. It sounds good, but wouldn't last long.

 

 

 

 

---

just to add, 

 

I don't have the answers, before anyone says that I have.  I do have ideas, like everyone does. My alternative is coalition governments in the short term. 

But, I will discredit people who say something must change but don't offer alternatives.

[crookesey]

5 hours ago, *_ash_* said:

But if the vote didn't go your way (whichever it is), you, or these people will just claim it's not fair vote, or papers swayed votes.

 

-

 

On another note I saw a post mentioning 'true democracy'

 

It's all the same thing. democracy is crap when the things aren't to your liking. 

 

Maybe a true democracy would be where everyone votes on everything, and government doesn't exist?

 

I couldn't it lasting as not enough people understand how money works and is spent. It would almost certainly end up with everyone voting to get all the money from the rich and give it to the poor. It sounds good, but wouldn't last long.

 

 

 

 

---

just to add, 

 

I don't have the answers, before anyone says that I have.  I do have ideas, like everyone does. My alternative is coalition governments in the short term. 

But, I will discredit people who say something must change but don't offer alternatives.

Yes I am fond of the word ‘democracy’ and have posted many times that we need a coalition government, however I am dubious that either will appear in the short term.

[m williamson]

9 hours ago, *_ash_* said:

 

 

I don't have the answers, before anyone says that I have.  I do have ideas, like everyone does. My alternative is coalition governments in the short term. 

But, I will discredit people who say something must change but don't offer alternatives.

In my post at 11 I gave an opinion on what I believe constitutes a true democracy. An elected Head of State, an elected upper House/Senate, a fair voting system which represents the wishes of the people, a written constitution which can be read and understood by the people and most importantly, the people to be sovereign. 

The state in any country holds enormous power over individual citizens. There needs to be some form of control over that power otherwise an individual is totally at the mercy of the state.

 

There is however little desire for change among our politicians who got where they are under the current system, which is why they avoided offering us PR as an alternative to FPTP in 2011.

One of their complaints about PR is that it does produce more coalitions. Politicians don't like that because they want unbridled power. We've seen how well that works over the past few years with an eighty seat majority. The advantage of coalitions in my view is that politicians have to compromise with each other and that' works out well when there's a change of majority party installed because there's no need to rip up everything that's gone before at enormous cost to the country. Germany has had coalitions since the war and it hasn't harmed their economy.

 

 

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, m williamson said:

In my post at 11 I gave an opinion on what I believe constitutes a true democracy. An elected Head of State, an elected upper House/Senate, a fair voting system which represents the wishes of the people, a written constitution which can be read and understood by the people and most importantly, the people to be sovereign. 

The state in any country holds enormous power over individual citizens. There needs to be some form of control over that power otherwise an individual is totally at the mercy of the state.

 

There is however little desire for change among our politicians who got where they are under the current system, which is why they avoided offering us PR as an alternative to FPTP in 2011.

One of their complaints about PR is that it does produce more coalitions. Politicians don't like that because they want unbridled power. We've seen how well that works over the past few years with an eighty seat majority. The advantage of coalitions in my view is that politicians have to compromise with each other and that' works out well when there's a change of majority party installed because there's no need to rip up everything that's gone before at enormous cost to the country. Germany has had coalitions since the war and it hasn't harmed their economy.

 

 

Quite so

[cressida]

11 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Verbose . Good word 

It's Welsh😏

[hackey lad]

41 minutes ago, cressida said:

It's Welsh😏

Well that’s another language I can speak . I will add it to my list