Every UK petition
-
Sorry, typo, meant to say defend not define.
Oh! Well that's a totally different slant haha! Thanks for the clarification.
-
Of all the arguments against democracy, I think this one is probably among the strongest.
In the past, this was solved by giving the power of the franchise only to the upper class, because those people at least had the time and education needed to consider their choices before voting. Of course, such a system would never work in the modern day. It would just result in a country turning into a cyberpunk hellhole.
But on the other hand, giving educated people stronger voting power than uneducated people seems to be a historically unexplored idea. Something like all citizens having one vote to start, secondary school graduates having a second, baccalaureate holders having a third, and then graduate degree holders having a fourth.
Education is tightly connected to parents’ education. A voting scheme like this would cement another aristocracy.
And it’s also against the ‘everyone has equal rights’ thingy we kinda agreed on.
-
Counterpoint: Brexit
That just proves the point. The politicians will do what serves them best, regardless of what's good for the people or the country.
-
I signed the petition but I had zero belief it would actually result in anything.
We don't actually live in a democracy, that's just something they tell us while they do whatever the bloody hell they want.
reminds me of my philosophy teacher arguing against someone because my teacher said that we don't live in a democracy, but a lot of people disagreed.
i still remember the look of disapointment in their face, since they had just told us the definition of democracy
-
reminds me of my philosophy teacher arguing against someone because my teacher said that we don't live in a democracy, but a lot of people disagreed.
i still remember the look of disapointment in their face, since they had just told us the definition of democracy
I love people who say "we don't live in a democracy because we live in a republic." Yeah, we don't live in a republic either, bitch.
-
Of all the arguments against democracy, I think this one is probably among the strongest.
In the past, this was solved by giving the power of the franchise only to the upper class, because those people at least had the time and education needed to consider their choices before voting. Of course, such a system would never work in the modern day. It would just result in a country turning into a cyberpunk hellhole.
But on the other hand, giving educated people stronger voting power than uneducated people seems to be a historically unexplored idea. Something like all citizens having one vote to start, secondary school graduates having a second, baccalaureate holders having a third, and then graduate degree holders having a fourth.
Sounds like sitution 1 with extra steps.
-
I love people who say "we don't live in a democracy because we live in a republic." Yeah, we don't live in a republic either, bitch.
i understand thinking you live in a democracy, but i've never heard people saying it's a republic
-
Education is tightly connected to parents’ education. A voting scheme like this would cement another aristocracy.
And it’s also against the ‘everyone has equal rights’ thingy we kinda agreed on.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It doesn't go against everyone having equal rights. It goes against everyone having equal power, which is not the same thing.
I'm also going to make a very bold and very unpopular claim that aristocracy is not an inherently bad thing. Every country already has an aristocracy of some sort, because aristocracy is defined as the group of people at the top of the social hierarchy. Even so-called communist countries have had aristocracies in all but name.
The only difference is that by acknowledging that you can't get rid of the existence of an aristocracy, you can begin to think about how one might control who is deserving of being in that class of people.
It is natural for intelligence to be somewhat tied to the education of one's parents. I don't see anything wrong with that. But at least with education, as long as people are given roughly equal educational opportunities, there will be chances for social mobility, and much more so than today. If you take a look at China's imperial examination system, as flawed as it was (largely based on the arbitrary memorisation of Confucian classics and essay-writing), it still provided unprecedented social mobility for the time, where any literate peasant could obtain a well-paid job in the imperial bureaucracy and prestige for their family. Yes, already-educated people had an advantage but that is not necessarily a strictly bad thing, as unfair as it seems from first glance.
Let me give a scenario to think about (this is not a proposal but just some brain food): What would happen if we administered a university entrance exam to all seekers of legislative office and gave the positions to the top 100 highest scorers? Obviously the average rich person would have an advantage over the average poor person, because they have better educations, but at the same time, poor people would have a much better shot of actually getting the office than they would under a purely democratic electoral system, and we have the important benefit that whoever does get the job is far more likely to possess basic thinking skills.
Again, not a real proposal, just something to think about. The system described above would definitely suck in reality if implemented as written, and it doesn't stop smart but malicious people from obtaining power.
-
I mean 122,000 out of 60 million isn’t a lot.
Could likely get 5 million to say banning people based on colour is a good idea, but I don’t agree.
why are you including infants amd people without the right to vote in your figure?
there's less than 48mill who can vote btw
-
This post did not contain any content.
Scotland stopped voting Labour into power over a decade ago. If only England had the balls to do it too. Torys and Labour, two sides of the same corrupt coin. Come England, youre better than that. Starmer is a tory cunt. Vote greens, or Libdems, or anyone else buy those two corrupt scum parties.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Pretty much - we all put our names to them, but they do nothing.
The best option is to organise writing campaigns to your local MP and indicate that this is the decider on your vote.
-
I love people who say "we don't live in a democracy because we live in a republic." Yeah, we don't live in a republic either, bitch.
A republic has a specific definition but we absolutely do not meet.
-
i understand thinking you live in a democracy, but i've never heard people saying it's a republic
They got it from American conservatives. Love idiot to idiot communication like this, two dumbass groups separated by an ocean using the same phrase incorrectly in different ways.
-
That just proves the point. The politicians will do what serves them best, regardless of what's good for the people or the country.
Yeah, that's very true. But they'll do the bad thing it even if there's a referendum on it.
-
It's a representative democracy, not direct democracy.
It's a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie
-
This post did not contain any content.
More like "This is good thing, please vote."
-
Scotland stopped voting Labour into power over a decade ago. If only England had the balls to do it too. Torys and Labour, two sides of the same corrupt coin. Come England, youre better than that. Starmer is a tory cunt. Vote greens, or Libdems, or anyone else buy those two corrupt scum parties.
wrote last edited by [email protected]LabourStarmer is just warming shitface Nigel's seat at this point -
On france, we currently have one with 2.1M signatures, gov still said nope (petition against reintroduction of dangerous pesticide, backed by sciencists community)
There is no legal binding whatsoever?
-
Well they did say yes once in 1215
wrote last edited by [email protected]To the Barons, not the plebes.
The Magna Carta was just a reapropportioning of power amongst the elites, who had the riff-raff fight and kill each other to determine how much power the King would have and how much would the other nobles get.
All but a handful of people were as powerless after it as they were before.
-
Just don't inconvenience anyone in any way.
Being slightly irritating is a terrorist activity now.
Also if you get too much attention you're hurting your own message
