Reassesment needed

[El Barto]

Reassesment needed.


From my point of view we need to review , or renew government and they way it is run.
I strongly suggest to add to this ..... separation of state and church ..... and add corporation.


Constitutions and government structure were created with the need of that time , yet times have changed. In the past we chose a representative to go off to the capital and represent us. It was sometimes a long journey, travelled by horse. News would get back many days later if not weeks when all was done and dealt with basically. Today we have instant communication , yet not always transparent are the dealings. Only power in the hand of the citizens is during an election if that is not stolen from them. We have the capability of instant input, mind you that would mean having the people interested and informed.


We have a constitutions for the people , we need one for the government towards it's people for it's obligations towards it's citizens, not having them run themselves to their advantage. Indebting a country with no plan of repaying should be a criminal offense towards the people. Politicians that create laws should not be above them in fact they should be more accountable!


We have the choice to take more control of our country , are we willing tho? Are we just too lazy and can not muster up anymore energy then to complain?

 

[Cliffy]

Reassesment needed.

From my point of view we need to review , or renew government and they way it is run.
I strongly suggest to add to this ..... separation of state and church ..... and add corporation.

Constitutions and government structure were created with the need of that time , yet times have changed. In the past we chose a representative to go off to the capital and represent us. It was sometimes a long journey, travelled by horse. News would get back many days later if not weeks when all was done and dealt with basically. Today we have instant communication , yet not always transparent are the dealings. Only power in the hand of the citizens is during an election if that is not stolen from them. We have the capability of instant input, mind you that would mean having the people interested and informed.

We have a constitutions for the people , we need one for the government towards it's people for it's obligations towards it's citizens, not having them run themselves to their advantage. Indebting a country with no plan of repaying should be a criminal offense towards the people. Politicians that create laws should not be above them in fact they should be more accountable!

We have the choice to take more control of our country , are we willing tho? Are we just too lazy and can not muster up anymore energy then to complain?

That is a mouth full that brings up a thousand more questions. The present form of government is so corrupt it is beyond fixing. The only alternative is to dismantle it and start a national process and consultation that would aim to redesign government altogether. The people lost control of government a long time ago, if they ever had any to begin with. Canada was the dream of the elite of the day, the rich. The government only appears to be a democracy but we only get to vote for who the ruling elite allowed us to vote for. If we really want a true democracy, we will have to let the government know, in no uncertain terms, that we do not support the present system. BUt, I fear, the sheeple out number the thinking population and this would take nothing short of a total collapse of the economic and social fabric of the nation before the sheeple wake up to the reality of the big red and white corporate d!ck that is being shoved up their butts every day.

 

[BornRuff]

We have a constitutions for the people , we need one for the government towards it's people for it's obligations towards it's citizens, not having them run themselves to their advantage.

Constitutions already cover both of these things. They lay out the relationship between people and the government, which implicitly goes both ways.

You have a lot of general ideas, but very little in the way of specifics.

How would you want more direct input in government, and do you think that would necessarily be a good thing?

 

[El Barto]

Constitutions already cover both of these things. They lay out the relationship between people and the government, which implicitly goes both ways.

You have a lot of general ideas, but very little in the way of specifics.

How would you want more direct input in government, and do you think that would necessarily be a good thing?

I started this and was disappointed with it. As for specifics.... I have a few ideas and I am sure there is more to be found. As for it being a good thing? I wonder too , just looking at what I se online here .... no.
Too many people love being back seat drivers.

 

[BornRuff]

I started this and was disappointed with it. As for specifics.... I have a few ideas and I am sure there is more to be found. As for it being a good thing? I wonder too , just looking at what I se online here .... no.
Too many people love being back seat drivers.

This may seem cynical, but I don't think the average citizen wants to be expected to engage in the political process on an ongoing basis. It is hard enough to get people to care once every few years when an election is called.

Recent history seems to show that whenever there are opportunities to directly engage the government outside of the election process, the only people who really get involved en mass are organized special interest groups. I fear that attempts to give people more power over the government between elections might just be handing more power to these special interest groups.

 

[El Barto]

This may seem cynical, but I don't think the average citizen wants to be expected to engage in the political process on an ongoing basis. It is hard enough to get people to care once every few years when an election is called.

Recent history seems to show that whenever there are opportunities to directly engage the government outside of the election process, the only people who really get involved en mass are organized special interest groups. I fear that attempts to give people more power over the government between elections might just be handing more power to these special interest groups.

Cynical or not it sounds like a clear assessment to me. I am sure the government would want it to stay that way. Basically , the weakest like here is the population in general.

 

[darkbeaver]

Democracy is inherently unstable and not suited to the poorly educated which of course is why the bankers promoted the daft idea of giving dullards votes on matters of national vitality in the first place. It was always understood that only a small fraction of the voting public would see let alone understand the real purpose of thier governments in the first place and these accidentally illuminated could easily be discouraged useing the time honored methods of the entrenched ruling class.
The rich and powerful know a hundred thousand funny jokes about democracy.

 

[BornRuff]

Democracy is inherently unstable and not suited to the poorly educated which of course is why the bankers promoted the daft idea of giving dullards votes on matters of national vitality in the first place. It was always understood that only a small fraction of the voting public would see let alone understand the real purpose of thier governments in the first place and these accidentally illuminated could easily be discouraged useing the time honored methods of the entrenched ruling class.
The rich and powerful know a hundred thousand funny jokes about democracy.

I don't think we really have any better system than democracy. As flawed as choices may be, unchecked power tends to be much worse.