|
P>> The electoral system is designed only to elect the Liberal/Labor party. S>Come now. The electoral system was designed before either of these parties existed. That's ridiculous. It's one party, and it doesn't matter what they call it. Maybe the PerpetuationOfPower party. Representative democracy as a system of "government" doesn't work. With apologies to John, whose efforts I admire, you are propping this system up by suggesting that a majority is going to get elected while the self-deceived elite makes the rules. It's fine to run a libertarian candidate as an act of charity and education, but don't tell me this system can change from within (yet). >> I'm trying to get people to understand the system. Good "representation" is impossible and majority rule (democracy) is always coercive to minorities. >.. as opposed to dictatorship, which is always coercive to majorities. That's right. There is a system worse than representative democracy. But the only way to avoid dictatorship is to vote with the currency of your choice in a free market. No dictators at all. >The elites know they are lying, and merely perpetuate the lies to satisfy greed and self interest. The proles are merely misinformed. I would rather try to convince the proles. I don't think the elites know they're masters of self-deception. That's where we disagree. I would be lying if I said I believed in the Liberal shmiberals but they aren't lying when they say it. That's why they're so good at it. Even you are still pretty good at trying to sell democracy, because you still haven't given up on it like I have. >> You seem to be able to cop the political dirt better than I can, but you have to admit the problem is systemic. It won't change simply by character-bashing. >I disagree. Character-bashing politicians is not only good fun, but also educational. Demonstrating that politicians will serve their own interests is one first step toward convincing people of the merits of small government. OK - I even added the word "simply" out of deference to people like you who are adding some value by bashing the politicians. It may help but it's not enough. You have to bash the Liberals too before you have any real credibility. Like the immigration issue where you turn into a ranting national socialist. >> >>"where does it work better than here?" >All the criticisms you level at the Australian government also apply to the US government. If you look closely at tax-rates, welfare mentality, subsidization of special interest groups etc etc, it's not that much different to here. No you're right that it's not much different, but it is a better-conceived system. The separate election of the executive branch certainly helps and the Bill of Rights delivered freedom of speech to Australia and everywhere else. Gun rights are much stronger there and I think the government is still afraid of the people there. The Australian government always reins itself in because it can't appear to be too much more draconian than the US government. In NSW the government almost jokes about civil rights as it imposes one disgusting restriction after another. The Americans had the idealism of William Penn's Philadelphia freedom which we've all been lucky enough to share to some extent. All that said, it's still a bad system in theory and basically we're all in the same system really - I mean the national boundaries are absolutely artificial and imposed by the Republican/Democratic party! >It's a close call, but I would rather live in Australia than the US. I think we do pretty well compared to them. The living is easy here and I love that about Australia. >The move towards free markets is a good one, and the free-trade argument is basically won. Well I think we need real free trade (fully de-regulated trade - ie. no taxes or legislation), but still being able to import cheap Chinese goods is probably helping us to understand some of the benefits of de-regulation. >>The "majority" doesn't matter except to collectivists. Only individual choice really matters. So democracy = collectivism? There's a lesson there. >Not quite. Democracy = collectivism if 51% of people believe in collectivism. They do, so it does. Sell individualism to them and it wont. Wait a minute! You're using a democratic definition of democracy. In the free market, democracy = doesn't work. >Change the mentality of the leaders of the mob, and they won't remain leaders after the next election. Change the mentality of the mob, and they will elect better leaders at the next election. Again - the only hope lies with the proles. Well, change both I guess. Maybe as in Rome, the increasingly feeble-minded emperor will fiddle while the empire burns, but this time free trade will rise out of the ashes. What are the soothsayers saying?
| 
