Thommy, I'm no fan of parliamentary 'democracy'. I completely agree.

But, in the past, it was MORE democratic than it is currently because previously the public had an influence in which candidates went up for election, now even that process is monopolised. It's inconceivable today that a good samaritan and known member of the community could get the selection of a party, because people in the seat don't choose, it's the power brokers in London.

It's just yet another hole in the system, but it's widening and continuing to do so, that's what I'm pointing out.

Yes, but I'm coming from the opposite direction - I don't believe that more democracy would make things better: I believe that the very concept of democracy as anything more than a myth to make people feel like they're in control of their government is flawed. It's not that "the current system doesn't work", it's more like "the fundamental paradigm makes no sense to me".

Ultimately, if you live in a society of enough people, you're always beholden to the government, no matter how it's run. If it's a democracy, then your vote doesn't really make a difference, and if it's a dictatorship or oligarchy or theocracy or whatever then you don't get a say anyway. So, either way, you as an individual don't get to decide (and nor should you - you're one person amongst millions). What I object to is that a democratic system lies about this societal truth and equates itself to freedom. The really worrying thing is when, as in modern America, personal freedom (which is the only thing that actually matters on an individual level - and owes nothing to democracy: there was no referendum to give women the right to vote, or to legalise homosexuality) is curtailed in order to save the vague (and fictional) concept of 'democratic freedom'.

Well first off, in alot of countries there were referenda on women voting, racial minorities voting, etc.



I still feel this is an arguement against current democracy and not the concept of it. For example, my vision of true democracy would exist on a local, decentralised level based on free association. If government as we know it were eliminated and democratically elected councils or even referenda used on a local, or workplace level to govern I think individual power would increase dramatically, as a single well made point or vote could swing a decision easily. I mean, you may for all I know be far more anarchistic than that, but I just think that this is what real democracy should be about, and it would give real personal power.

Yes, if society were reduced to a situation where individual communities were governed in that manner, then I can see an argument for democracy.

The real point, though, is that I don't care how a society makes decisions (because I can't affect it either way) so long as basic freedoms are maintained. As long as there's a right to free speech and assembly, then we can all change society through protest - whether you get to decide who's in charge every four years or not is irrelevant.

So, what I object to is the implication that these freedoms are part and parcel of the democratic system (which leads to arguments like "we're invading Iraq and making individuals' lives worse so they can be free" where "free" means "living in a democracy"). History is full of tyrannical regimes that were brought into power by popular vote, and styles of government not chosen by the masses that were still largely benevolent. Benevolence and tyranny are separate concepts from democracy and dictatorship, but the American-style rhetoric would have you believe otherwise.

Well I think we've managed to come together quite nicely then.


I can't be bothered reading what I have written , but if I myself implied that personal freedom was somehow endemic of parliamentary democracy I resend that.

The one exception I would take with what you've said would be the power of protest politics, which while I'd rather have it than not, I don't beleive will ever affect major change.

But, without giving too many clues away in regards to my super-secret identity, it's no time to embark on another debate. So, raincheck.

Good morrow, comrade.