# Should we get rid of democracy?



## UptheDeise (17 May 2009)

I think its time we gave democracy the boot, as in our current voting system.

We have a horrible political class in this country that trough their way through the Dail. They put their own interests and the interests of their cronies first. 

Let's have a lottery and just pick 166 names from a hat. Let these people then govern us. How bad can they be compared to the present lot? 

Any thoughts, suggestions welcomed.


----------



## NorthDrum (17 May 2009)

Did we ever have democracy . . . Its simply an ideal that only exists in our head, its not a reality for a majority of the country.

Democracy is about everybody having an equal opportunity. If I am a new candidate going up against a George Lee or a child of a former politician I am already at a disadvantage.

If I choose to be an independent candidate and dont have much money Im not really in the running as I dont have the backing of a huge party to help promote my beliefs.

If I am in a big party I am expected to vote on everything the top guy wants, thats not democracy thats a kind of dictatorship.

I had an interesting debate with a friend on what it would be like to have a dictator. One things for sure we would all know where we stand . . (ah no kidding, but it it shows how dissalusioned people are with our current setup).

I had another debate with a friend when I said to him that Democracy and capitalism contradict each others interests. Capitalism is about furthering your wealth by any means necessary (it hides behind the whole "rewarding motivation in people" ignoring the obvious in that it punishes those with less wealth). In essence the money men control our country. If I have no money, I have far less chance in getting elected or getting my interests looked after then if I was rich. With money you can get into power easier (or help get a puppit in power).

The best arguements for capitalism with democracy I hear is that its better then communism or fascism. That really is a "this is as good as it gets" arguement, which I dont accept.


----------



## UptheDeise (17 May 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> Did we ever have democracy . . . Its simply an ideal that only exists in our head, its not a reality for a majority of the country.
> 
> Democracy is about everybody having an equal opportunity. If I am a new candidate going up against a George Lee or a child of a former politician I am already at a disadvantage.
> 
> If I choose to be an independent candidate and dont have much money Im not really in the running as I dont have the backing of a huge party to help promote my beliefs.


 
if we just got rid of democracy and selected people via a lottery it would make no difference whether you are rich or poor.



> If I am in a big party I am expected to vote on everything the top guy wants, thats not democracy thats a kind of dictatorship.
> 
> I had an interesting debate with a friend on what it would be like to have a dictator. One things for sure we would all know where we stand . . (ah no kidding, but it it shows how dissalusioned people are with our current setup).


 
I don't know if you have misread the point I was tyring to make. I'm not saying we should get rid of democracy and install a dictator, I'm saying we should select people to govern us via a lottery.



> I had another debate with a friend when I said to him that Democracy and capitalism contradict each others interests. Capitalism is about furthering your wealth by any means necessary (it hides behind the whole "rewarding motivation in people" ignoring the obvious in that it punishes those with less wealth).


 
this is kinda going off the point when you bring in capitalism. Nonetheless, it is not in the best interests of a capitalist to see people poor. anyway all societies are both capitalistic and socialistic.



> In essence the money men control our country. If I have no money, I have far less chance in getting elected or getting my interests looked after then if I was rich. With money you can get into power easier (or help get a puppit in power).


 
And by bringing in a lottery system we would out the 'money' men and women in their place. They can't steamroll any politician because they simply don't know who's going to get selected.



> The best arguements for capitalism with democracy I hear is that its better then communism or fascism. That really is a "this is as good as it gets" arguement, which I dont accept.


 
I would prefer capitalism with democracy, rather than capitalism with communism or capitalism with fascism or socialism.

Incidentally that's what's going on in this country, a sort of corporate fascism with overtones of socialism.


----------



## S.L.F (17 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Let's have a lottery and just pick 166 names from a hat. Let these people then govern us. How bad can they be compared to the present lot?


 
Fine for the first year but supposing someone is doing a great job how do you get them back to finish the good work?

If you make an exception for them then you must make an exception for someone who has spent their whole time looking after their friends and wants people to believe they have done a good job.



UptheDeise said:


> I think its time we gave democracy the boot, as in our current voting system.


 
As long as people are prepared to believe lies there will always be bad politicians.



UptheDeise said:


> We have a horrible political class in this country that trough their way through the Dail. They put their own interests and the interests of their cronies first.


 
It's the same the world over



UptheDeise said:


> Any thoughts, suggestions welcomed.


 
I think a 1 man 1 vote is a great idea.

I want to be *the* man with the vote


----------



## UptheDeise (17 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> Fine for the first year but supposing someone is doing a great job how do you get them back to finish the good work?
> 
> If you make an exception for them then you must make an exception for someone who has spent their whole time looking after their friends and wants people to believe they have done a good job.


 
If a person is doing a good job I'm sure other people would lead by that persons example. 



> As long as people are prepared to believe lies there will always be bad politicians.


 
That's the problem to many people out there acting like sheep. like mushrooms kept in the dark and feed on bull manure 





> It's the same the world over


 
True, so why don't we change it.





> I think a 1 man 1 vote is a great idea.
> 
> I want to be *the* man with the vote


 
You do have the vote don't you


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

There are basic flaws with this proposition
You would have to change the voting laws.
That has to be done by the self serving politicians.
The people who were made into politicians would have to be advised by people who have a holistic view of the political map,who by default would become a non elective government.


----------



## UptheDeise (17 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> There are basic flaws with this proposition
> You would have to change the voting laws.
> That has to be done by the self serving politicians.
> The people who were made into politicians would have to be advised by people who have a holistic view of the political map,who by default would become a non elective government.


 
We could change the rules when we have our revolution 

As for your last point, many of our current politicians don't make any choices themselves. They use civil servants or expensive advisers, professionals, experts, pr counsultants and spin doctors. 

And we know where that has gotten us.


----------



## S.L.F (17 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> If a person is doing a good job I'm sure other people would lead by that persons example.


 
This is where our problem is, if someone is doing a bad job and getting away with it then why not follow suite.

I'd love to see a situation where if we vote a particular guy (or girl {or even woman}) into power and aren't happy with what they are doing why can't there be a method of kicking them out for someone else.

Basically a vote of confidence every year



UptheDeise said:


> That's the problem to many people out there acting like sheep. like mushrooms kept in the dark and feed on bull manure


 
FF has plenty of them



UptheDeise said:


> True, so why don't we change it.


 
This would require a revolution. 



UptheDeise said:


> You do have the vote don't you


 
No I want the vote.


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> We could change the rules when we have our revolution
> 
> As for your last point, many of our current politicians don't make any choices themselves. They use civil servants or expensive advisers, professionals, experts, pr counsultants and spin doctors.
> 
> And we know where that has gotten us.



So we would end up with the same end result anyway. my point exactly

Maybe  live Interactive voting would be the way to go,


----------



## shnaek (17 May 2009)

Yes, we could run a lottery, and things would end up pretty much the same. How great it would be if we could simply put the best in charge. 

For example:
Minister forEnterprise, Trade and Employment - Peter Southerland
Finance - George Lee
Transport - Michael O'Leary
Arts, Sport and Tourism - Bono
Social and Family Affairs - Mary Robinson

I don't know - just throwing it out there. Real leaders in our society. People who stand for something. People with vision. What a country we could have.


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

shnaek said:


> Yes, we could run a lottery, and things would end up pretty much the same. How great it would be if we could simply put the best in charge.
> 
> For example:
> Minister forEnterprise, Trade and Employment - Peter Southerland
> ...



No the idea is to get rid of self serving people not replace them with some of the same.


----------



## NorthDrum (17 May 2009)

I wasnt saying we should have a dictator, I was saying that people are so dissalusioned with the current situation that they jokingly talk about it . . I wasnt agreeing with the lottery idea either, I was really responding to the OP on democracy, simply stating we dont live in a democratic society, so theres nothing to get rid of.

Also, I think the point on capitalism and democracy is important. Democracy can be achieved with no money in society (so no reason for anybody to look to financially further their situation) once people adhere to the system. Its a utopian idea.

An arguement could be made that fascism and Communism never really got a chance because they were done with dictators hell bent on keeping power, as opposed to keeping the interests of the public to the fore of politics. The same could be said of democracy, its not really getting much of a chance under capitalist run society.

Im simply making the point that there has to be a better way that society can be run and lived. I see the same mistakes happening over and over and over again, while society is money driven and run by politicians voted on for their popularity as opposed to their ability to do a job.


----------



## z101 (17 May 2009)

I think so. I met a Labour candidate the other day who is running for the European elections who is very young and not only inexperienced, but is qualified at nothing and is on the dole I am told. We should at least have an iq test not just people who come forward because they dont like the government. This person may actualy get elected due to the current anti government backlash.
We should have a central committee of brilliant minds that candidates could apply to and run the country like a business... I think they had something like this in star trek!


----------



## UptheDeise (17 May 2009)

> So we would end up with the same end result anyway. my point exactly


 
No, we would not. We simply cut back the amount of government we have and the endless supply of money that our government currently uses.



> Also, I think the point on capitalism and democracy is important. Democracy can be achieved with no money in society (so no reason for anybody to look to financially further their situation) once people adhere to the system. Its a utopian idea.


 
I disagree, we have always had capitalism in our society going back thousands of years. People will want 'stuff' to improve their lot or just to survive. It's human nature.



> An arguement could be made that fascism and Communism never really got a chance because they were done with dictators hell bent on keeping power, as opposed to keeping the interests of the public to the fore of politics. The same could be said of democracy, its not really getting much of a chance under capitalist run society.


 
Fascism and communism will always lead to dictatorship because in order for those systems to work everybody has to agree. the only way to make people to agree is to cajole and threaten violence aganist them. We the end up with a ruling political class screwing people left, right and centre.


> Im simply making the point that there has to be a better way that society can be run and lived. I see the same mistakes happening over and over and over again, while society is money driven and run by politicians voted on for their popularity as opposed to their ability to do a job.


 
And one way in dealing with that would be to bring in a lottery. We don't know who's going to get in so popularity would count for nought.


----------



## mick1960 (17 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> No, we would not. We simply cut back the amount of government we have and the endless supply of money that our government currently uses.
> 
> 
> So to recap
> ...


----------



## Chocks away (17 May 2009)

So then we could always talk about the "good ol' days when we had a democracy and we could do anything within the law".  Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose"!


----------



## mick1960 (18 May 2009)

Or 'the roll over government was great.''


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> UptheDeise said:
> 
> 
> > No, we would not. We simply cut back the amount of government we have and the endless supply of money that our government currently uses.
> ...


----------



## jhegarty (18 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Every penny the government spends would have to be accounted for and I mean every penny.




Accounted to who ?


----------



## Padraigb (18 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> ...Every penny the government spends would have to be accounted for and I mean every penny...



Article 33.1 of the Constitution:


> There shall be a Comptroller and Auditor General to control on behalf of the State all disbursements and to audit all accounts of moneys administered by or under the authority of the Oireachtas.


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

jhegarty said:


> Accounted to who ?


 

To the public, us the taxpayer.

We would have a detailed list of all monies spent all expenses paid.


----------



## jhegarty (18 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> To the public, us the taxpayer.
> 
> We would have a detailed list of all monies spent all expenses paid.



But who does the checking. And how is it enforced.


It's not like there is a chance to vote them out.


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

We would have an auditor to do this. All spending made public each and every year.

Right down to the last penny.


----------



## jhegarty (18 May 2009)

Who appoints the auditor ?

What do they do if money is found missing ?


----------



## Padraigb (18 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> We would have an auditor to do this. All spending made public each and every year.
> 
> Right down to the last penny.



Do you want to rant, or do you want to deal with the facts? I have already told you that we have a constitutional officer for that very purpose.


----------



## Padraigb (18 May 2009)

jhegarty said:


> Who appoints the auditor ?
> 
> What do they do if money is found missing ?



http://audgen.gov.ie/ViewDoc.asp?fn=/home.asp


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

Padraigb said:


> Do you want to rant, or do you want to deal with the facts? I have already told you that we have a constitutional officer for that very purpose.


 

Yes, I read that earlier. I was responding to the other poster.


----------



## Mpsox (18 May 2009)

It's easy to say, let's get rid of democracy, the challenge is to come up with an alternative practical method of running a nation. A monarchy, in which some inbred born with a silver spoon has control, a dictatorship, (Hitler, Stalin, need I say more?), a theocracy like Iran?


----------



## Padraigb (18 May 2009)

Mpsox said:


> ... a theocracy like Iran?



We were close to that up to the 1960s.


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

Mpsox said:


> It's easy to say, let's get rid of democracy, the challenge is to come up with an alternative practical method of running a nation. A monarchy, in which some inbred born with a silver spoon has control, a dictatorship, (Hitler, Stalin, need I say more?), a theocracy like Iran?


 
Well I think we should give the lottery idea a go. Also won't it be great for diversity and multi-ethnicity?


----------



## Mpsox (18 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Well I think we should give the lottery idea a go. Also won't it be great for diversity and multi-ethnicity?


 
and how would you run the lottery? who would decide whose name was in there,? would you be able to take leave of absence from your job if you were selected? (all the time retaining the right to go back there when your time is up, similer to teacher-TDs). Would they get a pay off when finished(similer to current Tds). What incentive is there for them to do a good job if they don't have to take the risk of re-election?


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

Mpsox said:


> and how would you run the lottery? who would decide whose name was in there,? would you be able to take leave of absence from your job if you were selected? (all the time retaining the right to go back there when your time is up, similer to teacher-TDs). Would they get a pay off when finished(similer to current Tds). What incentive is there for them to do a good job if they don't have to take the risk of re-election?


 

We would select the people fromthe same list as we do juries. If people are selected they would have the choice wether they want the position or not.

Yes, we would allow people to return to their old jobs after 4 years. But they would be no pay off. 

The problem as I see it that they are too many people running for the Dail who are simply not up to the job. They are in it for themselves so too speak. Most of them are clueless, and I don't care how well educated they are, it means nothing if you can't use your head which most of our TD's do not.

They're plenty of folk out there, that are in touch with reality, have their feet firmly planted on the ground and would give it their all.

The system I propose would get rid of corruption or at least narrow it down, save the country millions in expenses and give the ordinary person a greated say in how the country is run.


----------



## Mpsox (18 May 2009)

alternatively if you got selected ivia lotery it could encourage you to screw as much out of the system in the 4 years you were in there knowing full well that you would not have to face the public and be re-elected


----------



## UptheDeise (18 May 2009)

Isn't that what alot of our politicians are doing?

If you do screw up and milk the system well then you will be held accountable under Irish law. Look what's happening in the UIK were there is actually talk of charges being brought against MP's.

The problem that we have in this country, is that we complain about our politicians and then turn a blind eye to it all and just move along. 

That will have to change, big time.


----------



## mick1960 (19 May 2009)

There are a few people on this thread who,because of the posts they have made who will,after the revolution, will not even be included in the lottery.You know who you are

Thank you for that point Mick1960.that brings my next question,how do you filter out people undiagnosed_ paranoid socio pathic with disillusions_  mental health problems from winning the Lottery and being put in charge of any department that could harm thousands if not millions of people. It can not be done with the present vetting system and if we vet the lottery PM s who does the vetting? or or do we vote on it?how do we vote?and if we vet who will vet the vetters?will it cost money?

Maybe people will vote different next time?


----------



## UptheDeise (19 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> Thank you for that point Mick1960.that brings my next question,how do you filter out people undiagnosed_ paranoid socio pathic with disillusions_ mental health problems from winning the Lottery and being put in charge of any department that could harm thousands if not millions of people. It can not be done with the present vetting system and if we vet the lottery PM s who does the vetting? or or do we vote on it?how do we vote?and if we vet who will vet the vetters?will it cost money?
> 
> Maybe people will vote different next time?


 
We won't have any filtering . How do we filter our politicians as it is now? And so what if some one has a mental health problem, that doesn't make them any lesser than the next person.

We won't have any votes. Just select 80 people from the hat (166 is too many anyways) and let them get on with the job of running the country.


----------



## Mpsox (19 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Isn't that what alot of our politicians are doing?
> 
> If you do screw up and milk the system well then you will be held accountable under Irish law. Look what's happening in the UIK were there is actually talk of charges being brought against MP's.
> 
> ...


 
So is your issue with democracy or is your issue with the fact that we have a lack of accountability in Irish politics?


----------



## UptheDeise (19 May 2009)

Mpsox said:


> So is your issue with democracy or is your issue with the fact that we have a lack of accountability in Irish politics?


 
Both. Lets dismantle the political class that now quite clearly are the new aristocracy is this country. 

Everything they touch they poison.


----------



## mick1960 (19 May 2009)

> UptheDeise said:
> 
> 
> > We won't have any filtering . How do we filter our politicians as it is now? And so what if some one has a mental health problem, that doesn't make them any lesser than the next person.
> ...


80 people who are chosen at random with no experience to replace 166 others with experience,I think that this should first have a trial run starting
at the Hospitals.


----------



## UptheDeise (19 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> 80 people who are chosen at random with no experience to replace 166 others with experience,I think that this should first have a trial run starting
> at the Hospitals.


 
Oh my gosh! What sort a person are you?

The same people who haven't a clue about how to run our country with all their 'education' and 'experience'. 

What a disaster they've caused.

I guess, I better bough down in front of these university graduates., these politicians, these dynasties, Oh ye masters. 

When are you going to start thinking for yourself?


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

> Oh my gosh! What sort a person are you?
> 
> The same people who haven't a clue about how to run our country with all their 'education' and 'experience'.
> 
> ...



It was your argument to let 80 people from a lottery with no experience and no advisers to to run the country ,instead of 166 who are there.
So why not use your model to run a hospital ?
A company?
A University?
It is your idea not mine.
Or is the fact that I can think for myself that has left you running for cover?
When a simple,yes this idea of mine needs some more thinking about,because in its present form it will not work.
or
Thanks,for all your posts they gave me a lot to think about.

Do not give up though,because one day you may come up with an original thought that you can defend with logic or facts.


----------



## UptheDeise (20 May 2009)

mick1960 said:


> It was your argument to let 80 people from a lottery with no experience and no advisers to to run the country ,instead of 166 who are there.
> So why not use your model to run a hospital ?
> A company?
> A University?
> ...


 

Alright Mick calm down, I was only winding you up.

From you posts, I assumed that you believe, our politicians have plenty of experience to run our country, they do not. I was talking to a politician the other day, who I know very well and he told me the government are manuring themselves because they haven't a clue what to do about the current mess we are in.


----------



## mick1960 (20 May 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Alright Mick calm down, I was only winding you up.
> 
> That makes two of us
> 
> From you posts, I assumed that you believe, our politicians have plenty of experience to run our country, they do not. I was talking to a politician the other day, who I know very well and he told me the government are manuring themselves because they haven't a clue what to do about the current mess we are in.




I think they are self serving pompous jobs for the boys club and they do not have a clue and should be kicked and some put on trial for Treason by people chosen in a Lottery.

I still do not think a Lottery government would work,but that apart. it would do as good a job as what is in place now.
A group of people from every country in the world on a coach trip would do a  better job,and they would have no local knowledge


----------



## S.L.F (21 May 2009)

It should be pointed out that the govt doesn't run the country all they do is set policy and the ones who run it is the civil and public service.


----------



## NorthDrum (21 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> It should be pointed out that the govt doesn't run the country all they do is set policy and the ones who run it is the civil and public service.


 
If that doesnt send shivers down your spine I dont know what will . . .


----------



## UptheDeise (21 May 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> If that doesnt send shivers down your spine I dont know what will . . .


 
The goverment also use PR consultants, spin doctors, experts and professionals that advised them on how to run the country.

So when you think about it, people who are not elected actually decides what goes and they get well paid for it. 

The politicians are a front for all this corruption and it's time we cleared out this rot.


----------



## Complainer (21 May 2009)

S.L.F said:


> It should be pointed out that the govt doesn't run the country all they do is set policy and the ones who run it is the civil and public service.


The Govt also allocate the budget (or lack of budget) which probably has more impact than the policy. There are lots of great policies on the books awaiting funding to be implemented.


----------

