gavin whittaker

In alt.uk.law Wallace-Macpherson <mm@without.iniref.org> writted:


:> In alt.uk.law Wallace-Macpherson <mm@without.iniref.org> writted:
:> : Gavin Whittaker wrote:
:>
:> :> In alt.uk.law Joe <fake@fake.fake> writted:
:> :>
:> :> : the 'democratic' system in this country gives us no say on individual
:> :> : policies, we just have to vote for the party that we think is 'best overall'
:> :> : (or more often, 'least worst').
:> :>
:> :> For the very good reason that most policies are interwoven with
:> :> others. I'll bet you could get the country to vote in favour of all of
:> :> the following: Lower tax burden, removal of petrol duty, improved road and
:> :> rail links, improved hospitals, more police, tighter privacy laws,
:> :> increased powers of surveillance of criminals.
:> :> Now, having enabled people to vote for all those things - and more -
:> :> how do you actually implement the mutually exclusive policies?
:> :>
:> :> Gavin
:>
:> : So, the politicians always know best, and MPs (and they have been asked) are
:> : fully informed about all bills which go through. Ha!
:>
:> That's not what I said, and you know it.

: You implied that the existing system ES is far superior to that which we proposed, (I
: and R) + ES.

Whilst I do think that, it does not imply that Politicians
always know best, nor do I believe that politicians are fully informed.
However, given a choice between 600MPs and 600 average people, I'd lay
the odds for an informed decision in favour of the first group. I don't
argue that they will always be right, just that they will be wrong less often.
:> : But we do not propose to abolish the system of parties, parliament and
:> : government,
:>
:> But you will make major policy subservient

: Rightly so, on issues which are held by a large group to be important and not
: adequately handled by their elected representatives. Finally, the whole electorate
: may decide.
:> Which could get held up every time Rupert Murdoch, for example, decides that
:> he doesn't like the new law on media ownership, TV sports rights,
:> allocation of satellite channel frequencies, or any other subject over
:> which media owners have both an interest and the power to influence.

: People are not as dumb as you think.

Yes they are. That's why there are pyramid schemes, extended
warranties, double glazing salesmen, door to door salesmen, and Daily
Mail readers. It's why we had gangs picking on paediatricians, and
why innocent child suspects were driven from their homes when James Bulger
was murdered.

: Who really believes what s/he reads in the
: papers or hears in the talk shows?

So why do people read them and watch them?

: Anyone can suggest a proposal. Gathering support is painstaking and the citizenry is
: unlikely to heed the media barons.

You are joking, right? one phrase: 'would the last person to leave
Britain please turn off the light'.

: It may be that sometimes decisions are called for
: on big issues such as nuclear power,
: GM stuff

Now there are two subjects that most people have an excellent
understanding of. Go and ask 1024 people how a breeder reactor works,
or gene splicing technology, and see how far you get. Ask them which
out of a coal-fired plant and a nuclear reactor produces most radiation.
Ask them which generates the most genetic contamination, GM crops or the
imported plants from the local garden centre.

: or aspects of taxation.

On which

: Complex issues
: can be handled. See e.g. Kobach's book about Switzerland (reference at
: http://www.iniref.org). The quality of public information and debate improves.
:> : People are capable of understanding public affairs and of weighing priorities in
:> : policy.
:>
:> Yegads - you really believe that? Many individuals may well be - no
:> doubt many of those you mix with, but work in a production faciility and
:> seen how much of the herd have herd instincts, don't think for
:> themselves, and follow the Sun/DM/Express blindly. How many of the 5000+
:> interviewees in the ICM/DM poll could actually give even a half-accurate
:> account of the issues, do you think?
:>
:> ATB, Gavin

: There were fifty thousand interviewees. The question was should there be a referendum
: on an important named issue - everyone understood that.

: Look, democracy in GB+NI is several hundred years out of date. New ways of doing
: things will have to be learned. Experience shows that if you introduce I and R then
: people (citizens) are grateful for the opportunities to participate and engage
: themselves to learn about the issues. There are studies showing that complex
: political issues can be handled sensibly by groups of "lay" people.

: RegarDDs

: Wallace-Macpherson
: Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R
: http://www.iniref.org

gavin whittaker

Apologies. This was a stored message that I was trying to delete.
Evidently I failed.

Gavin


In alt.uk.law Gavin Whittaker <ah05@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> writted:

: Whilst I do think that, it does not imply that Politicians
: always know best, nor do I believe that politicians are fully informed.
: However, given a choice between 600MPs and 600 average people, I'd lay
: the odds for an informed decision in favour of the first group. I don't
: argue that they will always be right, just that they will be wrong less
: often.

: :> : But we do not propose to abolish the system of parties, parliament and
: :> : government,
: :>
: :> But you will make major policy subservient

: : Rightly so, on issues which are held by a large group to be important and not
: : adequately handled by their elected representatives. Finally, the whole electorate
: : may decide.


: :> Which could get held up every time Rupert Murdoch, for example, decides that
: :> he doesn't like the new law on media ownership, TV sports rights,
: :> allocation of satellite channel frequencies, or any other subject over
: :> which media owners have both an interest and the power to influence.

: : People are not as dumb as you think.

: Yes they are. That's why there are pyramid schemes, extended
: warranties, double glazing salesmen, door to door salesmen, and Daily
: Mail readers. It's why we had gangs picking on paediatricians, and
: why innocent child suspects were driven from their homes when James Bulger
: was murdered.
:
: : Who really believes what s/he reads in the
: : papers or hears in the talk shows?

: So why do people read them and watch them?

: : Anyone can suggest a proposal. Gathering support is painstaking and the citizenry is
: : unlikely to heed the media barons.

: You are joking, right? one phrase: 'would the last person to leave
: Britain please turn off the light'.

: : It may be that sometimes decisions are called for
: : on big issues such as nuclear power,
: : GM stuff

: Now there are two subjects that most people have an excellent
: understanding of. Go and ask 1024 people how a breeder reactor works,
: or gene splicing technology, and see how far you get. Ask them which
: out of a coal-fired plant and a nuclear reactor produces most radiation.
: Ask them which generates the most genetic contamination, GM crops or the
: imported plants from the local garden centre.

: : or aspects of taxation.

: On which

: : Complex issues
: : can be handled. See e.g. Kobach's book about Switzerland (reference at
: : http://www.iniref.org). The quality of public information and debate improves.

: :> : People are capable of understanding public affairs and of weighing priorities in
: :> : policy.
: :>
: :> Yegads - you really believe that? Many individuals may well be - no
: :> doubt many of those you mix with, but work in a production faciility and
: :> seen how much of the herd have herd instincts, don't think for
: :> themselves, and follow the Sun/DM/Express blindly. How many of the 5000+
: :> interviewees in the ICM/DM poll could actually give even a half-accurate
: :> account of the issues, do you think?
: :>
: :> ATB, Gavin

: : There were fifty thousand interviewees. The question was should there be a referendum
: : on an important named issue - everyone understood that.

: : Look, democracy in GB+NI is several hundred years out of date. New ways of doing
: : things will have to be learned. Experience shows that if you introduce I and R then
: : people (citizens) are grateful for the opportunities to participate and engage
: : themselves to learn about the issues. There are studies showing that complex
: : political issues can be handled sensibly by groups of "lay" people.

: : RegarDDs

: : Wallace-Macpherson
: : Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R
: : http://www.iniref.org

wallace-macpherson

Hoots the noo!

Wearing my amateur shrink's hat, I diagnose that you subconsciously wish
to resume
discussing how to improve Britain's democracy ;-)

Don't worry, a related thread, about our pressing need for citizens'
initiative and legally binding referendum, will be coming soon.

RegarDDs

Wallace-Macpherson
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R http://www.iniref.org e-mail: info@iniref.org