tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post4494284668489734423..comments2024-03-29T17:12:19.648+13:00Comments on Bowalley Road: Not Dead Yet: A Response to Rachel Stewart’s Musings on Democracy.Chris Trotterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09081613281183460899noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-31285984410636663342017-05-27T23:19:01.877+12:002017-05-27T23:19:01.877+12:00We do not have a "Democracy".
That was...We do not have a "Democracy". <br /><br />That was proven from 1984, when the Government went bonkers, without any brakes.<br /><br />The Swiss have "Democracy". We have an uncontrollable rotating Dictatorship!KJTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-32434419593380708322017-05-11T15:18:05.500+12:002017-05-11T15:18:05.500+12:00Victor
About the constitution I think we do need o...Victor<br />About the constitution I think we do need one but not so tightly tied as the USA one which doesn't seem to retrain bad practices and yet constrains good ones, this quite without examples or reference, just how it seems to me.<br /><br />When there was an attempt to talk about the constitution here with the <br />C. Conversation, I had the unpleasant surprise to see how many old white men arose ready with their pitchers of acidic juice to pour onto our hardly obtained agreements with Maori etc. (this seems to be their main target, but I am sure not exclusively). My heart sank, the last action in their unenlightened, boorish lives seemed to be to sink our nation of which we can still feel proud, in a mire of whining, shrewish complaints showing their petty white-colonial ideas probably scratched into their desks at school or home.greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-12503341471119809212017-05-10T18:52:52.923+12:002017-05-10T18:52:52.923+12:00John Stowell
Apart from Ancient Greece, I'm ...John Stowell <br /><br />Apart from Ancient Greece, I'm unaware of any government system based upon drawing lots. Could you supply a bit more information on this? <br /><br />David Stone<br /><br />I raised the issue of juries because it's easy to gain deferment and, hence, difficult to get a representative sample of people to serve, with, to the best of my knowledge, those in busy and responsible jobs in shortest supply. <br /><br />So how much harder is it going to be to get a representative sample of people taking years out of their lives without any advantage to them other than "feelgood"? <br /><br />greywarbler<br /><br />I don't personally disagree with you over the monarchy. But I nevertheless suspect that discussion of a republic will revive once HM passes away. <br /><br />I was merely pointing out that, to my mind at least, you can't have a republic without a constitution. But, for what it's worth, I think we could do with a written constitution even if we remain under the Crown. <br /><br />Recent events in the UK, which also doesn't have a written constitution, have underscored my conviction on this issue.Victornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-76333120481275815512017-05-09T20:21:26.281+12:002017-05-09T20:21:26.281+12:00Kiwiwit (on 3 May)
I would like to assume your po...Kiwiwit (on 3 May)<br /><br />I would like to assume your post is total satire, but I think you may have been serious. Could you kindly outline the democratic systems your right wing party of choice (National, Act, the Maori Party, United Future) use to elect their leadership in which "individual members" participate.<br /><br />I'll just sit here and collect tumbleweed for the fire in the meantime...pigmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16373560358977537670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-82406788418808597382017-05-09T11:17:56.272+12:002017-05-09T11:17:56.272+12:00Anonymous
You are leery of anybody having any iden...Anonymous<br />You are leery of anybody having any identification are you, even as to gender, age, experience with community service, education level etc.<br /><br />It is a weak point of democracy as presently practised that there isn't a leadership council that can give some advice and background to the wider community who then have to pass a scratch test to establish a basic level of understanding of the country's problems. And this should be preceded by civics taught in school about how frameworks for building a working economic and social community need to be devised. With our few screening measures, what results from present voting is mainly a mass of opinions with inadequate understanding. That way we got Roger Douglas rushing in like a tsunami and we had no understanding of what was likely to be the outcome.<br /><br />Boats can tip over and drown everybody if all on board rush to one side to look at something. People have to understand more before they vote,<br />not rush in and enable saboteurs to tip over our democracy and standards so long gathered, so quickly dissipated.greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-7704340780257584142017-05-08T22:21:17.114+12:002017-05-08T22:21:17.114+12:00Victor and John
There's no more reason to ...Victor and John<br /> There's no more reason to pay an exorbitant salary to a balloted senate than to a jury. It would be an honour and a duty and no one should be able to welch because they'r making too much money doing something else. It should be in the order of what they get paid anyway.<br /> It's a great idea.<br />D J SDavid Stonenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-39150775118149882462017-05-08T20:08:05.762+12:002017-05-08T20:08:05.762+12:00Sorry, that last comment to greywarbler was me onl...Sorry, that last comment to greywarbler was me only I pressed the wrong button. And on the monarchy: if we devise a written constitution, which I hope we do, we still need a head of state to rock up when other heads of state are visiting, to sign bills into law and so on. I suppose the Windsors could continue to do this, through a Governor General, but my personal preference would be to say goodbye and thanks very much to the notion of inherited royalty. An elected head of state would still be essentially a ceremonial post, provided the constitution made it such, so any comparison with the US is invalid. John Stowellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-28143328728662833262017-05-08T13:06:48.958+12:002017-05-08T13:06:48.958+12:00greywarbler
Participatory budgeting has been aroun...greywarbler<br />Participatory budgeting has been around for some time, again just not in NZ so far as I know. I would love to be proved wrong on this. It is at least one way to get both citizens at large and professional politicians used to the idea that people can make their own decisions. Citizens enjoy it and politicians discover that the world does not fall apart.<br /><br />Again, I am leery of imposing pre qualifications on who can be chosen by lot other than that they are willing and part of the voting register. Some people describe elective or representative democracy as perpetuation of an elite, and selection by lot as truly democratic since anyone on the electoral roll might end up in Parliament, and the goes back to being ruled once their term is up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-92166515516150717622017-05-08T12:57:35.774+12:002017-05-08T12:57:35.774+12:00Victor
Well, I prefer to leave the Athenians out. ...Victor<br />Well, I prefer to leave the Athenians out. Slaves did most of the work, and women didn't count as people. Not really out of the box either as there is lots of discussion of selection by lot, just not much of it in NZ. The basic method for selection by lot requires a large body of citizens who have agreed to participate. I am not keen on applying any filters as that gives room for distortion and unfairness. If the assembly is too small it is unlikely to be very representative of, for instance gender balance, income, age, locality etc. There needs to be study of how to achieve a useful result. Any volunteers out there in academia? Certainly members of the citizens assembly would have to be paid sufficiently well to make up for the disruption to their lives, as one of the other points about selection by lot is that once you have done your time, you can't be selected again.John Stowellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-63062053424105151902017-05-08T12:27:37.588+12:002017-05-08T12:27:37.588+12:00I can't see why so many are certain that the m...I can't see why so many are certain that the monarchy must go. Becoming a republic which is supposed to make democracy more effective is not at all the only way for a modern country to go. And looking at the horror of the USA, the reality of it, spreads a spume of filth from that volcano over the lovely idealistic dream below.<br /><br />This is Wikipedia on constitutional monarchy. Note that the Scandinavian countries that seem like resevoirs of reason compared to the USA, are there and have a good standard of living amongst the citizenry. <br /><i>There remain, as of 2016, twelve (12) sovereign monarchies in Europe. Of these, seven are kingdoms: Denmark, Norway and Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are of pre-modern origin; the kingdoms of the Netherlands and of Belgium were established in 1815 and 1830, respectively; the Kingdom of Spain, founded in 1479, was abolished in 1931, restored in 1947/69, before Spain transitioned to democracy in 1978 as a constitutional monarchy.[1] The principalities of Andorra, Liechtenstein, and Monaco and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg were restored as sovereign states in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars. The State of the Vatican City was recognized as a sovereign state administered by the Holy See in 1929.[2]</i><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchies_in_Europe<br /><br />People criticise our Queen and says how wealthy she is and that UK can't afford having that wealth aggregated at the top. Another way to look at it is that the country can't afford to let the monarchy go, and 90% of the wealth held by self-styled czars of finance. <br /><br />If the underlings seem bad now, but at the top is someone who is responsive to public opinion, as our royalty is with fixed ideas of service and the nobility of the country and being a little too old-fashioned as to talk about peeing in the shower like Key, well we're better off than having some venal hypocrite in royalty's place. Not only some intolerable greaser or jock, but with another spending a Queen's ransom trying to replace them. <br /><br />Let sleeping Royals lie. They actually don't sleep all the time, and do a valuable job encouraging and being patron for entities that have important functions in society. And while they hold the top position tightly it is out of the hands of the psychopaths who would try to replace the tradition of monarchy with their own diseased view of how they want to live, and the country should behave.greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-31535633900373555432017-05-08T10:48:27.736+12:002017-05-08T10:48:27.736+12:00"This then does appear to be a concern on the..."This then does appear to be a concern on the social democrat left and really is quite arguably just them looking to blame their (personal) political failures on the voters, as per this Stewart person."<br />"Shows democracy is in fine shape, just when needed."<br /><br />No it doesn't. It shows that people are sick and tired of the establishment parties of the left and the right. They are desperately looking for new faces, and if the normal right or left parties were putting them forward along with some fresh ideas, they might just go for it. I mean if the Conservatives were popular in France, Marine Le Pen wouldn't have got any votes. People only vote for fascists when they're desperate. And in fact voters have voted for a new fresh face, who doesn't have any political experience – not necessarily a bad thing – but who also doesn't have a party with seats in parliament or whatever the French call it. That shows desperation rather than common sense, and desperation is really bad for democracies.Guerilla Surgeonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03427876447124021423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-26810399010684759972017-05-07T14:53:19.367+12:002017-05-07T14:53:19.367+12:00John Stowell
The idea of an upper house drawn by ...John Stowell<br /><br />The idea of an upper house drawn by lot is fascinatingly Athenian.<br /><br />But you'd have to make it more difficult to avoid serving than under the jury system or you're not going to get a representative sample of senators (or whatever you<br />want to call them). <br /><br />Alternatively, you'd have to pay everyone concerned a huge salary for three years (or however long their selection is intended to last). I'm not sure whether or not that would frustrate democratic principles.<br /><br />Congratulations, though, on your "out of the box" thinking. <br /><br />BTW I agree with you over the need for a written constitution, just so long as it doesn't become an object of reverence as per the US variant.<br /><br />I suspect that, when HM QE2 passes away (which, personally, I hope won't be for many a year), New Zealand will start looking at republican status. But I can't imagine how we could then transition to a republic without some sort of entrenched basic law.Victornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-38301068167851129672017-05-07T14:47:14.402+12:002017-05-07T14:47:14.402+12:00You are dense Anonymous. Like many you don't...You are dense Anonymous. Like many you don't understand that a pseudonym is an alternative name. Chris asks us to stick to the one name/call sign for that reason. People who can't understand that can't expect to be respected for their attempts at more convoluted topics. (And there is a way of using Anonymous if it is easier for the commenter, and that is to sign off with the pseudonym or call sign or own name- their choice. Remember that even if someone uses a first-and-surname, we don't know that it is the real name or a penname/pseudonym.)<br /><br />John S.<br />I like your idea of participatory budgeting, and I am wondering if there could be a Council of NZ which sets what bills come before Parliament, runs the select committes to decide on the framework and important points, and there would be a limited number say 30 people, a base of experience from universities, business and skilled expertise, and a group of citizens with local government experience, and then a group of ordinary citizens who have put their names forward after passing certain requirements, and who are random picked from selected locations, gender and background. <br /><br />The Parties would look to this body as the major arbiter of what is wanted and have to bring their own experts forward if there was disagreement and be mediated. It would take the gloss of being a politician as their power to use their power to extend grace and favour to wealthy contacts would be uncertain even curtailed. <br /><br />No-one should say this would be too complicated. Those who try and guard the rights of the people and also guard against egregious decisions and actions from present government know that they are fork-tongued about efficiency, effectiveness, budgets, serving the public and are right now thinking up some new idea to push the people down the nearest stairs they can conjure up.greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-36218958090614641992017-05-06T22:52:21.481+12:002017-05-06T22:52:21.481+12:00There is heaps of room to improve our NZ democracy...There is heaps of room to improve our NZ democracy. I would love to see much more public debate of the proposal by Palmer and Butler for a written constitution, and for it to include the creation of a second house of Parliament selected by lot and empowered to review and amend bills proposed by the House of Representatives, and to initiate legislation independently of the government of the day. We could also start using participatory budgeting, as a way of empowering communities and giving them power to make some decisions. There are many ways of making democracy both more rewarding (I am not talking money), more fun, more deliberative and more effective in reflecting people's views. John Stowellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-60249935831005957992017-05-06T19:27:19.139+12:002017-05-06T19:27:19.139+12:00Your screen name isn't much more enlightening,...Your screen name isn't much more enlightening, greywarbler! Anyway, at least we agree that disagreement is healthy from time to time. Which is good because I disagree with you that vitriol is excusable, and I also disagree that civilised discussion has yielded little practical and positive result. That's precisely how the vast majority of parliaments decisions are made! We only hear the disagreements reported and even then it's not nearly as vitriolic as Ms Stewart. I would further argue that vitriol is resorted to by those who know they are not on the right side of the argument.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-54824599132427777092017-05-06T12:25:42.122+12:002017-05-06T12:25:42.122+12:00@Anonymous 7.55 6/5
At least Rachel writes under a...@Anonymous 7.55 6/5<br />At least Rachel writes under a recognisable name so that there is a known identity to critique. Unlike yourself coming out of the mist and steam.<br /><br /><i>Does it help us understand the issues any better than the same information presented in a civilised manner?</i><br /><br />It certainly vitalises the somnolent slugs in society to react anyway. And there are a majority in this country who need such stimulation.<br />It's useful shock jock tactics if it can be so classified. No-one has to agree with everything that others say, therein lies discussion!<br />Discussion in a civilised manner has been held for decades with little practical and positive result, now is the time for pointed debate, hopefully only using table forks.<br />greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-55089658322088159182017-05-06T10:32:45.312+12:002017-05-06T10:32:45.312+12:00On *The Nation* an ex(?) Green Party staffer talki...On *The Nation* an ex(?) Green Party staffer talking about Winston Peters says: (forgotten exact words): " It doesnt matter what people think. You dont do what people want you do what's right"jhnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-57996736663531175492017-05-06T07:55:49.365+12:002017-05-06T07:55:49.365+12:00In my opinion, Rachel Stewart is a shock jock in w...In my opinion, Rachel Stewart is a shock jock in written form. Click bait, perhaps. And you clicked on it. <br /><br />I believe she is just after clicks and will wind up readers using vitriolic attacks on things large parts of the population value (a large part do still value farming which is why she gets the desired blow back). This is why the Herald took her on - she is very good at it. But is that valuable? Does it help us understand the issues any better than the same information presented in a civilised manner? <br /><br />I formed my opinion after reading of her threats of violence to others and looking into her writing and past more closely. She appears to use vitriol to write columns which don't address anything that hasn't been addressed previously but those who value the things she attacks will click on it in a fit of outrage, and apparently even blog about her!<br /><br />Ultimately she and the Herald are free to publish it, but we as a civilised society shouldn't mistake it for writing worthy of our perusal. We don't have to read it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-12201258737096361392017-05-05T15:44:38.293+12:002017-05-05T15:44:38.293+12:00Funny, the American public is much more left-wing ...Funny, the American public is much more left-wing than most of its politicians. They want things like single-payer medical insurance and the like. But they don't get them, because money buys democracy in that country. Still Chas, your man Trump is buggering up the right with a will, and I suspect that after the Republicans are massacred in 2018, if at all that is possible because of Republican gerrymandering – another danger to democracy in the US – the American public might for once get what it wants.Guerilla Surgeonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03427876447124021423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-18557241963064113402017-05-05T13:18:15.887+12:002017-05-05T13:18:15.887+12:00I was reading about France the other day and the w...I was reading about France the other day and the writer was lamenting (only a little) the demise of the Socialist Party and wondering if democracy in France was in trouble.<br />This then does appear to be a concern on the social democrat left and really is quite arguably just them looking to blame their (personal) political failures on the voters, as per this Stewart person.<br /><br />Because, as we observe, a fresh face, independent centrist man is about to become French President, defeating the nasty party woman (sorry Stewart, you would prefer an extremist woman). <br /><br />And only a month ago the Dutch used democracy to chose a sensible moderate party to lead their government....<br />Stewarts thesis is simply rubbish.<br /><br />And he has demolished the increasingly corrupt Socialists and Republican Establishment too. Shows democracy is in fine shape, just when needed.Charles Enoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-79593122638827373722017-05-05T09:44:12.480+12:002017-05-05T09:44:12.480+12:00Stewart challenges politicians goals and values th...Stewart challenges politicians goals and values though Vowles considers she is applying too wide a brush, "But it is both extreme and insulting to assert that politicians in general are controlled by corporate interests and only out for themselves." I think his criticism is unjustified and that the problems of corporate lobbyists and self-interest among politicians are becoming stronger every decade, along with the power of the 1%.<br /><br />Professor Vowles makes the point that democracy can only approximate what any individual thinks is best and that Stewart expects too much. "Of course, no set of political and economic institutions can deliver a perfect society defined by one person’s or group’s values." But because of the inequalities which are growing in society, and the wealth available to influence politicians and campaigning, the wealthy group's values are defining our society, eroding Vowles assertion. <br /><br />In the USA the citizens saw their government closed down because credits were withheld by their (supposed) representatives playing hardball. So the people see and feel that they are powerless in the hands of the elite group running their political system. Therefore they strike back with support for the iconoclastic Trump. In Woody Guthrie's The City of New Orleans "The sons of Pullman porters..and engineers, ride their fathers' magic carpets made of steel"...but unrealised by them "all the towns and people seem, To fade into a bad dream, And the steel rails still ain't heard the news". The USA that the people believed in, that they helped build, is being withdrawn from them. The 'wealth creators'<br />are still at work, but they are not channelling it along steel rails that the people can travel on, gain benefit from. Gradually the people are getting the news, and the response is 'What have we got to lose, vote Trump (or whoever will provoke change, and he is sure provoking).<br /><br />So getting policies and politicians to serve the needs of the whole nation is becoming more difficult and requires from political scientists and concerned, committed democrat citizens constant thought and revision for new approaches. These must look to both the known, projected unknown, but also guessed future. This requires using both imagination and records to allow adaptation of historical practices fallen out of use, retention of present useful thinking and systems to add to new developments so we can face the future. And 'face' is an important word as technology is replacing personal, physical discourse and citizen inter-activity which is the foundation of society. (The current trend to a cashless society, not even card use, but all through greywarblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-30844532002215445732017-05-05T09:37:37.510+12:002017-05-05T09:37:37.510+12:00ah, the enduring loneliness of the long distance c...ah, the enduring loneliness of the long distance columnist…<br /><br />Rachel has only been here for five minutes in comparison to Chris, but a literary spat remains good entertainmentTiger Mountainnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-62867669664335572252017-05-05T00:01:34.209+12:002017-05-05T00:01:34.209+12:00As Ms Stewart doesn't believe in voting (altho...As Ms Stewart doesn't believe in voting (although she may herself vote) and as, alternatively, she does not seem to be organising her own personal Brownshirt or Red Guard militia to overthrow our tattered but far from wholly eroded democratic order, I see no requirement to take her seriously. <br /><br />Yes, she's a symptom of a troubling Zeitgeist. But there are other symptoms thereof far more worthy of our concern.Victornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-13797281363086908142017-05-04T20:30:15.661+12:002017-05-04T20:30:15.661+12:00Well, for what its worth....you are overly analysi...Well, for what its worth....you are overly analysing the situation IMO. The reality is the aetiology of her "behaviour"can most easily be explained by recourse to a reputable psychiatric opinion .The truth I think !Geoffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-72194808153026250842017-05-04T12:21:29.549+12:002017-05-04T12:21:29.549+12:00Looking at Professor Jack Vowles critique of Rache...Looking at Professor Jack Vowles critique of Rachel Stewart's piece.<br />I think that it should be looked at as a despairing rant that one does FTTT and afterwards, feeling better, you pick up your tools and go back to working on patching up the democracy you have with discussion on further improvements. Indeed Vowles almost suggests that when he says that it seems attempted satire. "She is emotional and opinionated, and contemptuous of people who continue to defend and support democracy. Indeed, her position is so extreme that at times one is led to consider the possibility the piece is a failed attempt at satire. "<br /><br />Professor Vowles comments on Sirota, a 'Canadian legal academic' who argues that individual voters don't make much difference anyway, so who needs them as they are likely to be uninformed. Those who do vote are likely to be affected by sloganeering rather than being more committed to the polity. But that misses the point, that the individual needs to be heard and treated fairly, so must be encouraged to flex his or her muscles to defend their individual rights. Vowles thought is that "A single vote is an individual act that may seem to have little impact but votes counted collectively can be extremely powerful." <br /><br />The result of a change of government with a change to better policies for the disaffected individual or group is another matter. Perhaps that is why Stewart is quoted as suggesting one should pray about this! Vowles quotes the difference that black people made in the USA in the 1960s when they started to vote. It may indicate how important voting groups are as stories of malpractice in handling electoral registers in areas of high poor citizenry there arise, such as the name of one citizen jailed resulting in all the people with the same name being dropped from the register. Is that true, one doesn't know, but there are ways developing of denying people voting rights, and legal redress to unfair conditions whichever government is in power. And if blacks are affected, they do seem to resort to prayer together as group bonding.<br /><br />I think Rachel Stewart's opinions may be understood by this quote from George Bernard Shaw:<br /><i>The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.</i><br /> George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists" Irish dramatist & socialist (1856 - 1950) <br />http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/692.htmlgreywarblernoreply@blogger.com