?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
Democracy - Ed's journal
sobrique
sobrique
Democracy
The problem with democracy, is that 50% of the population is of below average intelligence. (I was going to say 'sub normal, however it appears that the definition of sub normal when applied to intelligence has a different meaning of below 80 IQ.)

In the UK, we don't really live in a democracy. Our prime minister is elected from within his party by the rest of the party. The parties themselves gain power on the basis of gaining consituency seats around the country.

The problem is, that everyone wants a free lunch. Oh they agree that the UK must become great and economically powerful, but don't like the idea of building an airport near them.

They want to have good public services, transport, healthcare, benefits but dislike the idea of having to pay more tax.

They want freedom do what they want, except in situations where someone is doing something they don't like, in which case they must be stopped and laws made against it.

And at a pretty fundamental level, politics is a popularity contest, rather than a question of who's going to be best to run our country.

I would propose that the right way to run a country, is the same as running a company. You pick a person who you think would do a good job. And you call them Prime Minister. You find someone with good financials knowledge, and make them the budget minister.
And you appoint people to your 'board of directors' not from the popularity contest, but in the same way as would would any other job - advertise, interview and appoint. Choosing a selection of 'experts' with real life experience of how the world works, to give their viewpoint on a subject.
A teacher to advise on the education system.
An IT person to advise on information policy.
A solider to advise on defense policy.

But through it all, operational guidance comes from the 'top'. Tasks may be delegated downwards, in a 'I trust you do deal with this' kind of way.

The political system as it is, gets turned into a 'citizens forum for issues' to allow the free and fair discussion of services vs. taxes etc. But their opinion is treated as advice, rather than doctrine.

Obviously there will be those who object to such a radical change in the way things are done in this country. Not least of which, those that are currently in charge at the moment.

However, it should not be forgotten that in the UK we have a reigning monarch. And the majority of our armed forces and police are primarily loyal to the Queen. Dissent will occur, and the masses will object. They will also be oppressed, and will hate their lack of political choicese. But lets face it, election turn outs have dropped so significantly, that it's only a minority that even care any more, who's running the country. At least this way we get someone competent running the show.
11 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
crashbarrier From: crashbarrier Date: June 3rd, 2004 03:19 am (UTC) (Link)
The problems these days are the Government is not seen to do anything but put tax on everything. They are seen also to Lie (not implied to lie but seen to lie). They have been shown to be incompetant.

Todays generation thinks that voting isn't worth the effort cos there "isn't a point"

And really when ou look at it from their POV they may be right. There is no difference between Labour and the Conservatives. The Liberals are pretty weak and ineffective. And the other parties don't seem to have any organisation or dynamic drive. Except the Nationalist Party our new up and comming "star" of politics. (which is quite worryign cos its mostly filled with thugs??? and the thought that the Thugs are more organised than the politicians is quite horrendus).

I vote cos my parents taught me how to.

I believe that all voting/ballot sheets should have a Non Of The Obove choice, so that we can measure correctly the number of people saying that they do not want to vote for the candidates (that whould scare the pants of paliament)

I also believe that maybe we would benefi from a benevolent dictator.. but i know that they never stay benevolent for long
lisekit From: lisekit Date: June 3rd, 2004 05:00 am (UTC) (Link)
50% of the population is of sub normal intelligence.

"Below average", not "sub normal".

Below average, of course by definition (well, below the mean anyway). "Sub normal" has a quite specific meaning; much as I think rather too many of the population really are sub-normal, even I don't think it's as many as 50%!
sobrique From: sobrique Date: June 3rd, 2004 05:35 am (UTC) (Link)
I was under the impression that 'normal' was synonymous with 'average' in a statistical sense.

Relating to or characterized by average intelligence or development.
lisekit From: lisekit Date: June 3rd, 2004 05:45 am (UTC) (Link)
A classification of the mentally subnormal

CLASS I.Q. LEVELS

Borderline cases 70 –84
Mild cases(educable) 55 – 69
Moderate cases(trainable) 40 – 54
Severely deficient 25 – 39
Highly severe below 25

http://www.indiaparenting.com/raisingchild/data/raisingchild020.shtml
sobrique From: sobrique Date: June 3rd, 2004 05:48 am (UTC) (Link)
Hmm. So 'of sub normal intelligence' has a different meaning to 'below normal' in a statistical sense?

I shall amend my posting :)
katiger From: katiger Date: June 3rd, 2004 06:21 am (UTC) (Link)
Hmm your post reminds me of a quote by Winston Churchill, "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

By the way I friended you earlier on tonight in a fit of procrastination. I'm not to sure how I came across your journal so uh yes hullo!
sobrique From: sobrique Date: June 3rd, 2004 06:33 am (UTC) (Link)
Hello.
Welcome to my random diatribe of utter tosh :)
(Deleted comment)
sobrique From: sobrique Date: June 3rd, 2004 06:43 am (UTC) (Link)
I'm not convinced. I think that if you speak to most squaddies, you'll find that they think well of the Queen, and ill of those political REMFs who send them to get shot in Iraq.

After all, they are called "the Royal Marines" "Her Majesty's Armed Forces" and every naval vessel is 'HMS' something (Her Majesty's ship).

OK, the Queen has mostly been content to keep schtum and not intervene, but I don't doubt that she's the best placed person to take over operations again.

Mega-corps in control, I don't think is a good idea. I mean, not every government decision should be driven by the balance sheet. I'm taking pretty much a dictator ship (or perhaps 'monarchy') but with the caveat that re-election is 'performance related' rather than 'popularity related'.

With a 'cabinet' of advisors, _some_ of which probably would come from 'big industry'. (After all, there are definitely some skills applicable to large scale companies that would transfer). The rest would be from appointees 'in the know' - teachers, doctors, nurses, parents, etc.
jorune From: jorune Date: June 3rd, 2004 11:35 am (UTC) (Link)
There's trolls in the kitchen cabinet.
sobrique From: sobrique Date: June 3rd, 2004 03:17 pm (UTC) (Link)
I don't know what you're talking about ;p
11 comments or Leave a comment