Wow... England Needs A Revolution..., page 30

Pages: << 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 72 times

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 12:10 PM by christina-66

reply to post by Freeborn

'Abolishment of the party political system' - Yes please. 'Consensual Government'. Another wee secret they've been keeping from us.. e.g each region elects their own representative based on their actual abilities.

I also reckon there has been a good few occasions over recent decades where 'power of recall' would have been implemented. I also believe that would probably have saved a lot of lives.

The concept of rolling elections is very interesting indeed. I think it would end the days of the career politician.

Gordon Brown did nothing but read books prior to his involvement with politics. (Gordon Brown - Early Life and Career before Parliament) Even then he was only reading books about politics. How one dimensional - not the kind of person capable of making decisions in the real world.

There's a lot more like him coming through these days. If they don't simply have a degree in politics they're a blasted lawyer. What do any of these kind of people know about the reality of the world they're creating for us? They live in a theoretical bubble.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 12:27 PM by EvanB

This week I have been doing a lot of reading about Alfred, and even though he did his best to defend the land he also allowed the church to become powerful. He was a pious fool!

This is where piety started the rot in our political system with men becoming beyond conviction in their decision making using the law, both secular and religious to twist to their own ends and feeling duly justified by doing so.

This prevails today also and is the core of the sickness that is destroying our country.

I feel that devolution, national and regional assemblies, though democratic, are a step right back to our distant past where each village had its own laws, language and culture. This worked then to a point, but they warred against each other and were suspicious of each other.

More than ever we need unifying, not devolution. The lessons of the past stand testiment to that fact.

We are a fractured people living in a country with ghettos and split communities who do not talk to each other. We are a nation where each persons house is his country and is suspicious of his neighbour.

Our government feels justified to lead such a place. This has to change, but what would unite us? In the past it was always a common enemy who was clearly defined, but our enemy seems to be the system itself that through peace has destroyed many.

How do you slay this dragon called the system if you cant see it??

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 01:09 PM by Freeborn

reply to post by EvanB

The Swiss Federation is proven to work.....and the Swiss cantons don't fight with each other.

The Australian and USA Federal systems work.
Granted neither of them have the direct democracy that Switzerland has, but the federal framework is there and it works.

The Federal system ensures local interests are looked after and allows for a certain amount of regional autonomy within a federal Union.

Seems ideal for the UK to me....and it would hopefully mean our good friends in Lewes would no longer see the need to blow up parking meters,

reply to post by christina-66

I saw many of that type in industry with the large influx of middle managers with no real life experience at all other than that gained in bodies of education and suburbia.
They have absolutely nothing in common with the shop floor and 'coal face' managers and there are frequently complete communication breakdowns.
These managers have nothing but personal advancement and financial goal as motivations.

If's hardly any wonder we see exactly the same thing in politics.

We have the basis there for a political system that would be representative of the peoples will at all levels whilst offering financial and military security.
It is free from restrictive and dogmatic politcal ideaology and provides accountability whilst rewarding honesty and integrity.

It's an absolute no brainer in my eyes....but we all know it's just a pipedream.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 02:53 PM by christina-66

reply to post by Freeborn

We have the basis there for a political system that would be representative of the peoples will at all levels whilst offering financial and military security.
It is free from restrictive and dogmatic politcal ideaology and provides accountability whilst rewarding honesty and integrity.

It's an absolute no brainer in my eyes....but we all know it's just a pipedream.

It is a no brainer but why should it only be a pipedream?

I had a wee peek at your profile and see that you and I are roundabout the same age. Please don't take offence - but we're almost at the age where we can start talking about 'the old days.'

I have this horrible nagging sense that our generation, Thatcher's lost generation, almost have a duty to become active politically and socially. This is our generation's time of power. The 50's kids blew it....they proved themselves to be power hungry,egocentric and chronically unimaginative careerists.

Unlike them we have a far greater opportunity - courtesy of modern communication technology - to actually get something together for very little capital outlay. We've already had a volunteer for graphic design on this thread

Originally posted by sapien82

@everyone
You know , you lot are a bunch of smart people . and I think we could see eye to eye on most things . I say we do form a political party and we each delegate an area of britian , we first build our manifesto , I can do the graphic design needed for the promotional leaflets , palmflets, posters.

Sapien82 your offer did not go un-noticed

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 03:20 PM by stumason

Originally posted by christina-66
Unlike them we have a far greater opportunity - courtesy of modern communication technology - to actually get something together for very little capital outlay. We've already had a volunteer for graphic design on this thread

Then lets get organised! I would drop the English Democrats in a heartbeat for a "party" that follows the things we have discussed here.

Ironically, we would have to form a party to change the system, which is ideologically opposed to Freeborn's mantra of an end to party politics.. Not sure how he feels about that!

I will add that the Swiss have political parties too and seem to get on alright with them - it's not the idea of a aprty that is the problem, it's how they are held accountable and use the system..

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 03:21 PM by stumason

reply to post by stumason

Also, if it is offers of expertise you're after, I work in Telecoms and, if I do say so myself, I am quite an adept strategic planner.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 03:56 PM by Freeborn

reply to post by christina-66

As stu pointed out, I am strongly opposed to the very idea of political parties.
I think they limit free and individual thought, are restrictive and dogmatic, promote adherence to party line over personal conviction and generally detrimental to the democratic process.

Of course I recognise the urge and benefits of aligning oneself with people of a similar viewpoint, especially if real change is to be achieved.

It is quite the conundrum.

A movement or group aligned with one specific aim or goal, in this instance a change to direct democratic government as outlined, free from any political ideology or agenda maybe acceptable.
Hopefully it would attract support from a broad section of political beliefs.

I would probably support and offer advice etc, for what little it's worth, to such a group but would in no circumstances take any publicly prominent role...I have a full cemetery of skeletons in my closet.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 04:06 PM by stumason

Originally posted by Freeborn
As stu pointed out, I am strongly opposed to the very idea of political parties.
I think they limit free and individual thought, are restrictive and dogmatic, promote adherence to party line over personal conviction and generally detrimental to the democratic process.

Of course I recognise the urge and benefits of aligning oneself with people of a similar viewpoint, especially if real change is to be achieved.

It is quite the conundrum.

A movement or group aligned with one specific aim or goal, in this instance a change to direct democratic government as outlined, free from any political ideology or agenda maybe acceptable.
Hopefully it would attract support from a broad section of political beliefs.

To be honest, I think a group or party that had a strong founding in a democratic process could work well as long as it never lost touch with the grass rooots. Or maybe have a party that had only a few core beliefs (such as outlined in this thread) and left the rest of the policy area's open for public debate and referenda.

It is a pickle though. One has to be in the system to change it, without violent revolution anyway.

Originally posted by Freeborn
I would probably support and offer advice etc, for what little it's worth, to such a group but would in no circumstances take any publicly prominent role...I have a full cemetery of skeletons in my closet.

Haha, don't we all. Personally, I feel that if kore politicians and others in public life acknowledged that they are in the end human and we all do things, then society would be better.

For example, we all know that most people at some point in their lives will smoke a spliff. Anyone who goes to Uni is probably going to do lots of things, but when the MP's are "confronted" with such things, they will squirm and say things like "I never inhaled"... I wish for the day when one will turn round to accusations of smoking dope with "Yeah, I did. What's your point?".. That would take the wind out of the tabloid sails straight away and, I think, gain some respect from the public for being honest and admitting their humanity.

I have many a "skeleton", but I wouldn't shy from public life because of it. I would use it to prove what I preach is a personal belief and not one I think will win me votes.

Surveys over the years, for example, have shown that if Politicians said they smoked weed, they would on average gain a 2% swing in their favour vote wise. Similiarly, if MP's table a motion to legalise it, public support would swing even further.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 04:10 PM by EvanB

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by christina-66

As stu pointed out, I am strongly opposed to the very idea of political parties.
I think they limit free and individual thought, are restrictive and dogmatic, promote adherence to party line over personal conviction and generally detrimental to the democratic process.

Of course I recognise the urge and benefits of aligning oneself with people of a similar viewpoint, especially if real change is to be achieved.

It is quite the conundrum.

A movement or group aligned with one specific aim or goal, in this instance a change to direct democratic government as outlined, free from any political ideology or agenda maybe acceptable.
Hopefully it would attract support from a broad section of political beliefs.

I would probably support and offer advice etc, for what little it's worth, to such a group but would in no circumstances take any publicly prominent role...I have a full cemetery of skeletons in my closet.

Haha

Dont we all?

Maybe thats what is missing in government. Men and women who tell the truth, admit their faults and past but am passionate about the country.

I would vote for that!

Though I agree in principle to your proposal my reservation comes from someone needing to make hard choices as a leader.

However

I guess in a true democracy we lead ourselves on big issues eg a referendum for going to war.

You still need a figurehead to represent the countries interests around the world and a unifying figure when tshtf.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 04:35 PM by Freeborn

reply to post by stumason

Ha ha...if only my 'transgressions', and they are very much plural, were just for having the odd spliff.

But that's very much for another time and place.

Maybe both you and Evan are right and in the publics eye such a revelation would humanise a person.
It's something else for me to think about, just think that maybe I have one or two too many.

For now I will say bugger it, I'm up for doing something other than just spouting off on these boards and am willing to get involved in orgainising something along the lines we have spoken about.

Let's see who else will ante up?

And remember; from small acorns....!!

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 04:44 PM by stumason

reply to post by Freeborn

well, I can tell you now I am up for it..

For too long we have whinged and whined on these boards, but we don't really do anything about it. I think the time has come to get off our arse and mobilise.

After all, if those pillocks in the EDL (and they are pillocks) can organise, then I am sure educated persons such as us can get going.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:00 PM by EvanB

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Freeborn

well, I can tell you now I am up for it..

For too long we have whinged and whined on these boards, but we don't really do anything about it. I think the time has come to get off our arse and mobilise.

After all, if those pillocks in the EDL (and they are pillocks) can organise, then I am sure educated persons such as us can get going.

Well said

These boards have become just another sounding board and rant forum, however it has also shown that even the most "challenging" people can agree to the basic building blocks of something this country well and truly needs.

I would offer my own blood and treasure for it to happen

Because God knows this country needs it and we owe it to our kids and those who went before us.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:09 PM by christina-66

reply to post by Freeborn

I'm in - With any luck I'm about to become underemployed. I have my time to offer - my most precious commodity.

I think a non-partisan system is perfectly plausible with the direct democracy model. The requirement for allegiances would be greatly reduced because every major decision is in the hands of the citizenry. The representatives have no authority to themselves determine what decisions the citizenry regard as being important because all that would be required would be a petition of XXXX amount of names.

The efficacy of allegiances may also be reduced methinks - especially if we keep the whole rolling election idea alive.

The SNP should by rights fall on it's sword if it ever actually achieved independence....but they're enjoying playing politics too much to actually do that.

We could simply have a policy that upon our success in the election and implimentation of the necessary framework to facilitate a consensual direct democratic model - that would be the end of us - our job is done.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:14 PM by EvanB

I think a non-partisan system is perfectly plausible with the direct democracy model. The requirement for allegiances would be greatly reduced because every major decision is in the hands of the citizenry.

reply to post by christina-66

It would also get the citizenry interested in their own country again and destroy the apathy with everyone having a stake.

A bit like being shareholders lol

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:23 PM by christina-66

Originally posted by EvanB

I think a non-partisan system is perfectly plausible with the direct democracy model. The requirement for allegiances would be greatly reduced because every major decision is in the hands of the citizenry.

reply to post by christina-66

It would also get the citizenry interested in their own country again and destroy the apathy with everyone having a stake.

It would be worth it just for that.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:30 PM by stumason

Ok, so we're all in agreement (hope you were sat down for that)

What are we going to do about it?

(I feel like some 19th century ideological activist now - conspiring in a dark room somewhere to change the world )

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:42 PM by christina-66

Originally posted by stumason
Ok, so we're all in agreement (hope you were sat down for that)

What are we going to do about it?

(I feel like some 19th century ideological activist now - conspiring in a dark room somewhere to change the world )

I have a very good feeling about this. I think the time is just right for it. Nearly everyone in this country is sick of the status quo It's radical enough - and sensible enough - and to be able to point to the relative calm of Switzerland by comparison is in itself a very persuasive argument.

Methinks in this 21st century we start a facebook page or some such thing to begin with to share some of our ideas and recruit others to our cause - seek volunteers to firm up ideas and contribute to some kind of manifesto type document and put to good use all other volunteered skills. These kinds of things are magically organic if it's the right time.

From there raise awareness - by every means possible. That's when the imagination can really start to play

edit on 6-9-2011 by christina-66 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:45 PM by EvanB

Originally posted by stumason
Ok, so we're all in agreement (hope you were sat down for that)

What are we going to do about it?

(I feel like some 19th century ideological activist now - conspiring in a dark room somewhere to change the world )

Marketing

Talking as a marketing manager (had my own business), you have to research the market as it were. We have a bare bones manifesto but just because we see a percieved need not everyone sees it the same way so research adds meat to the bones and makes it universal.

I even know how to get funding for this though it would have to be done through a "company" as it were.

We also need to utilize social media, set up a website and have a name.

So what do we call ourselves?

We also need to be in contact too, have a meet and do some real darkroom strategy planning.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:55 PM by EvanB

And just to add

If you lot are serious I would cut short or not go to dubai.

This is more important than personal gain

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:57 PM by christina-66

reply to post by EvanB

Marketing

Talking as a marketing manager (had my own business), you have to research the market as it were. We have a bare bones manifesto but just because we see a percieved need not everyone sees it the same way so research adds meat to the bones and makes it universal.

Totally agree - properly test the water.

So what do we call ourselves?

For the life of me I can't think of anything catchy. The British Direct Democrats has a very pipe and slippers ring to it

But some creative person on this thread is going to come up with a much better suggestion.