Government legitimacy

[TenPenny]

The day a poor man makes it into the Canadian system is the day I'd give you two cents for anything coming out of the mouths of the nabobs and crooks that run this nation...

Interesting concept, but I'd wager that any "poor man" with the wherwithal to be Prime Minister is not going to be a poor man, because they will have the wherwithal to not be poor.

Put another way, would you trust leading this country to someone who can't improve his/her own life?

 

[MikeyDB]

TenPenny

So long as we tacitly accpet that the measure of a mans "success" is the demonstration of his wealth through what he drives and where he lives ...the trinkets of gold and silver festooned around an imaculately cultured and draped body...then yes, the "success" of a man can be "measured" by wealth and his ability to demonstrate his capacity to generate wealth for himself...

I guess it's not very important in the greater scheme of things that a man of values and intellect be accorded respect and opportunity...

what we want and love and what we've got.... greed driven cultures with wealthy nabobs robbing us blind to prove to us what great men they are....

 

[TenPenny]

I guess it's not very important in the greater scheme of things that a man of values and intellect be accorded respect and opportunity...

In order to be a leader, one needs ambition and the desire to lead. If one has ambition and the desire to lead, one would, generally speaking, not be poor. It's not that we need a leader to be rich and successful, it's that people who would be good leaders are successful (not rich, necessarily) BECAUSE of these traits. The two sort of go hand in hand

 

[darkbeaver]

In order to be a leader, one needs ambition and the desire to lead. If one has ambition and the desire to lead, one would, generally speaking, not be poor. It's not that we need a leader to be rich and successful, it's that people who would be good leaders are successful (not rich, necessarily) BECAUSE of these traits. The two sort of go hand in hand

Ambition in of itself does not determine direction, niether does a desire to lead as you have stated,ademocratic forces have molded the system to filter out prodemocratic leadership and ambition, it is commonly believed that unrefined ambition and raw leadership are the backbone of corporate western systems of governance. No corporation is even remotely democratic. So success in a corporate background ensures the stifling of democratic social change serving the commonwealth of the nations citizenry.Corporate greed represents the single most powerfull special interest group and lobby, untill that changes that's the way she'll go even if it costs us education, health, and necessary infrastructure. I heard Dion state yesterday that he would strongly support our competativness, big deal,what we need to support is cooperation IMO :wave:

 

[MikeyDB]

Sure I get it...

Al Capone...Keneth Lay....all the truly successful people who've manged to build wealth through leadership....

Stealing from the poor, demonizing the handicapped and using religion to bilk millions out of millions...

These folk would be wonderful politicians right?

 

[TenPenny]

No, but since you're given to totally misunderstanding what I was saying, have at it. Enjoy yourself, I've got riches to worship.

 

[MikeyDB]

No I don't think you understand what you're saying.

You're suggesting that the wealthy have some exclusive focus on what's in the best interests of the nation ...of the people of a nation....

I don't happen to agree that the Paul Martin (214 millions net worth) leadership represents the best interests of the poor and the average person making their way through life. I don't agree that the WalMart Waltons who condone sweatshops and minimum wages in the name of profit taking represent the best interests of the people. I don't believe that the metric of wealth alone grants anyone the corner on having the best interests of the people at heart.

Choosing to embrace the metric of personal wealth and gain as the measure of a mans responsibility to the masses is just as ludicrous in my opinion as the failed strategies of Marx and Lenin.

Leadership reduced to the metric of wealth...has gotten us to the point we're at...a planet nearing the end of its ability to sustain the people of this planet while the wealthy pass laws and make exceptions for the industries and social institutions that are most responsible for destroying our planet...

 

[L Gilbert]

I don't think a lotta people understand what they're saying.
For instance,the topic says,
" In a democracy can a government be legitimate if elected with less than 50% of the votes?"
I say no. Democracy means "rule by majority". more than 50% of votes is a majority and anything less is not. The name of "rule by majority" should be changed or the definition of democracy needs changing, otherwise, stick to the plan, Sam. Canada is an oligarchy, plain and simple. There are democratic aspects, but we are still only an oligarchy.

 

[MikeyDB]

Oh sure...Les

Get technical on us...

Democracies protect the wealthy so why shouldn't the wealthy be the ones on the tickets that the rest of us rubes get to choose from...?

And when did a democratic government ever behave like a democracy....

Canada needed a railway built...Shanghai Chinese into building it then flush them down the pooper...Americans want next-to-slave-labor to do all those messy jobs good clean Aemericans don't want to do...but as soon as the proportion of Hispanics gets uncomfortably large kick their behinds out...

Democracies run by efficient money-mangers gives rise to wealthy people collecting money in campaign drives.... How much money can a poor person afford to contribute to the person or party that they think best represents their interests....

 

[atlanticaparty]

Oh sure...Les

Get technical on us...

Democracies protect the wealthy so why shouldn't the wealthy be the ones on the tickets that the rest of us rubes get to choose from...?

And when did a democratic government ever behave like a democracy....

Canada needed a railway built...Shanghai Chinese into building it then flush them down the pooper...Americans want next-to-slave-labor to do all those messy jobs good clean Aemericans don't want to do...but as soon as the proportion of Hispanics gets uncomfortably large kick their behinds out...

Democracies run by efficient money-mangers gives rise to wealthy people collecting money in campaign drives.... How much money can a poor person afford to contribute to the person or party that they think best represents their interests....

Why not reform the electoral system then? Provide equal campaign funding for all candidates among other things?

 

[tamarin]

Democracies simply don't work. It's time we moved on and found something better.

 

[L Gilbert]

Actually representative democracy doesn't work that well. A nice little republic with a method of direct democracy works nicely.

 

[BitWhys]

Actually representative democracy doesn't work that well. A nice little republic with a method of direct democracy works nicely.

interesting. I'm curious as to what exactly you mean by that so indulge me here...

name one.

 

[tamarin]

Ah, imagine a direct democracy without its rulings being subject to the whim of the Supreme Court. It would be interesting! And think too of such a state being free of the fetters of an overreaching Charter that seeks to prejudice views before they're elicited. It could prove intriguing! All too often democracies are fashioned to deceive. Checks and balances usually check first.

 

[atlanticaparty]

Ah, imagine a direct democracy without its rulings being subject to the whim of the Supreme Court. It would be interesting! And think too of such a state being free of the fetters of an overreaching Charter that seeks to prejudice views before they're elicited. It could prove intriguing! All too often democracies are fashioned to deceive. Checks and balances usually check first.

What is to keep DD rulings from being unjust?

 

[folcar]

Any electoral reform must be accompanied with free votes, and those must be protected once in place. I like proportional voting, but i am uncertain as how to choose who would get to go into office. At least in the existing system the people of each demographic area get to choose the person they think most represents them. I do think the seats accross the country need to be brought in line with population numbers, the senate needs to be elected and i am also in favour of an elected supreme court.