Modern Civics

Hello all,I live in Australia so I am not too familiar with the government systems of the UK and USA.However, I believe that not everyone should have the right to vote.In Australia, voting is not voluntary. It is madatory.I think there should be some sot of test to see if you are smart enough to make the decision of who to vote for. I also think that the people being voted for need to be tested. At the moment, one of the two people in the race for the top job in Australia is Tony Abbot.He is conservative catholic, wood be priest, seminary drop out, an opponent of abortion, stem cell research, euthenasia, antienvironmentalist etc etc etct greatly concerns me that someone like this has weaseled his way to where he is and it concerns me more that there are enough fucking idiots in Australia who may vote him in.We have had recent great ideas not voted in because government spin doctors can con enough of the stupid people to vote the wrong way.It is all very nice to believe that everyone should have the right to vote, but why should a large number of stupid people choose who makes the decisions?In my house, My partner and I make the decisions. It is not a democracy. This is because my two daughters would vote to spend all of our money on junk food instead of paying the bills. As there are 4 of us, it would be a hung parliment until we all starved to death.It is little different when considered nation wide.I dont have a better system really. I would suggest that IQ tests and a history of altruism would be a good place to start for polititians.A high IQ and a history of fulfilling your reponsibilities to society would be a good start at choosing who can vote.I think it would be a good idea if smart, altruistic polititians were voted on by smart individuals who had earned the right to vote by fulfilling their civic reponsibilities.

Hey Caffeine,I expect a few knee jerk reactions like yours... Most of them yes. But I mostly disagree with the how he makes his decisions. His religion and his disregard for the environment are two common elements of his decisions. Not always, but often Idiots or the misled. Often people think they are doing the right thing. There was a recent campaign over a mining tax issue where misinformation was sown so successfully that most people had no idea what they were really deciding. Dis I say that? Or are you creating a straw man to shoot at?As a matter of fact, I didn't say anythinglike that.What I did say was - I did not suggest that I should rule. Or suggest an alternative form of government eg absolute monarchy or tyrany as you suggest.I did not suggest that there should be absolute rule. By me or anyone.What I actually said was - Notice that I was suggesting that there is still many people voting. Not absolute rule or anything like it.What I actually said was - Would you like to address that statement or are you happy with your strawman?

Hey Caffeine, This is the internet. Overall, snarky is not too bad really. I was not ignoring the earlier parts of the thread. Just not partilularly familiar with the other forms of government. And a bit disillusioned with my countires ways at the moment. No test is perfect. But it may be better than what we have now. And yes, there are always ways to work out how to exclude a certain voting group in order to succeed. This is one of the reasons that a history of altruism would be important for the people being voted on. I agree with all of this. And it sux. It sux that people are like this. It sux that it would create this problem. I would like to have a form of government where I can trust that they are making the right decisions for me. Regardless of whether I can vote or not. I dont think that humans are ready for that yet though. I would love a system of government where voting by the majority is not even required. There would be a group of leaders who organise themelves who had everyones best interests at heart and made their decisions accordingly. Not too long ago here, we had our prime minister removed from his position by powerful mining concerns because he was going to introduce new policies that would protect the environment and give more money to the australian people. The cost of this would come from the huge mining companies. They did not want this to happen, so they meddled in politics. Democracy failed us. This is true. It is also part of the problem. Private companies her in Australia have run huge multimillion doller misinformation campaigns when political parties attempt to introduce things that may affect their profits. Recently, taxation on mining giants has been the big issue. The misinformation was so wide spread that hardly anyone I spoke with had any idea who was telling the truth anymore. These companies knew that all they had to do was confuse everyone and scare everyone and they would win. I had friends who work out in mine camps where spin doctors did the rounds. There were spin doctors outside shopping centers in many regional communities frightening the wives and girlfriends.Everyone got an equal say, but hardly anyones say was an educated opinion.Everyones say was predetermined by millions of dollers of misinformation and scare campaigning.That is not a good way of making decisions.Everyone getting a say gave the yanks this guy...twice...

Hello,Sorry to butt in. I have been lurking but would like to post again... Peoples votes should be weighted by their knowledge and understanding of the issue being voted on. This makes sense. Look at human civilisation like a big business. The people who know about accounting make the accounting decisions. The people who know about the law make the legal decisions. If you dont know something, you have a research and development group who find out.In my work we rarely ask the cleaners to make finance decisions. It would not make sense for all of the departments to vote on subjects that only one group know anything about. This is the problem with the human species. Individual rights over the species. Fools, fanatics, fundamentalists, people who do not know or understand the topic and people who make a random selection are more important than the species and the planet.Why the fuck cares what is important to the populace? Everyone should care. Have you ever heard of the tragedy of the commons? Our species and our planet are in great danger of being destroyed because of this philosophy that an individual is of greater importance than the whole.What exactly is it about you that you think makes you so important that your views are more important than the species? For a huge amount of people, being a dutiful citizen is too much work. For example, 1 in 32 Americans is either in prison, or on parole. (Source:Crime and Punishment) That is a lot of people who find it too difficult to be a dutiful citizen. Since tghe end of WW2 the amount of people hwo have turned up to vote has barely surpassed 60%. (Source: http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm). That means that 40% or more find it too difficult to be a dutiful citizen.People are lazy and stupid.And I dont have a problem with some elements of fascism, particularly exalting the nation over the individual. I would expand it further than that and say the planet or species over the individual.Feel free to call me a fascist although the label is not accurate.

Hey Coyote, I do agree with this in some areas but not others. I am en environmental scientist so I regularly speak to people or witness problems created by this idea. Indidviduals who believe that their accumulation of wealth is more important than the environment of the planet and/or the well being of all of the future generations.I have 2 children. I love kids. I would like to have more kids. I would have a whole bus full of them if I could.But I wont. I will not do this because overpopulation is a problem and no couple should have more than 2 children.So I have put my planet and my species above my own individual wants and needs.The current economic problems in the USA can be attibuted (at least partially) to this as well. Who allowed this to happen and why? A small amount of people have turned a huge profit to the disadvantage of an entire nation and the world.If the big bank and government decision makers were putting the American people ahead of their own desires for great wealth, would the USA be in the situation it is currently in?Look at problems like illegal hunting and overfishing. Individuals putting their desires over the rights of all.Illegal dumping of rubbish (toxic, radioactive etc). Individuals putting their desires over the rights of all.The tragedy of the commons - The tragedy of the commons is a dilemma arising from the situation in which multiple individuals, acting independently and rationally consulting their own self-interest, will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource, even when it is clear that it is not in anyone's long-term interest for this to happen.
(source: Tragedy of the commons - Wikipedia).I dont think any individuals rights are equal to the rights of every other individuals rights combined.My understanding of the US economic situation is very small so if I am totally of base let me know and I will edit/delete that section of the post.

I agree.When was the last time you saw a protest with people screaming about their responsibilities?

Hey Dogmafood, I have never heard democracy described in terms of stupidity before. It is a good description. There are lots of good reasons that a good citizen would put the nation above him or herself. If someone does this of their own accord (like the examples I provided in the reply to Coyote) are they a fascist?Am I a fascist because I have chosen not to have more than two children because I put the nation, my planet and my species above my own rights and desires?

Hello Dr A, This problem does not go away in a democracy. I would say it is just as much a problem in a democracy. The USA is a democracy. The current financial crisis seems to be caused by people, including politicians acting in their own self interest. We would need to find some people who are extremely altristic. Or have an independant body set their pay.The biggest problem we have seems to be that people are arseholes. I dont know how to fix that. I expand my view to the planet and the species. Is democracy doing this? How do we judge it? But we need individuals to be responsible citizens in order for this idea of democracy to work. People need to be equally invested in fullfilling their responsibilities as they are to demanding their rights.This is not what is happening.Like I said to Coyote, when was the last time you say someone out with a banner screaming at the TV cameras about their responsibilities?

Hey NoNukes,If people are unwilling to do something that will eventually become necessary, then they will eventually be forced to do it anyway.It is not just for the good of my nation.It is for the good of the planet and our species.People need to be controlled. We often wont do the right thing unless we are forced to do it. Thats why we have to have police. People have to be forced not to drive drunk in order to protect other people from being killed. People are arseholes.

Hey Jon,Are there police in Minnesota?

Hey Jon, I want people to earn their rights. I am also not American. I have not said anything about contsitutional right. I dont care about the American constitution.I have also repeatedly stated that I expand my view to be the entire planet of Earth and human species.I happily accept your title of fascist if that means that I put the wellbeing of planet and the wellbeing of all humans alive and in the future above my own personal rights and desires. Who is stopping them from finding out the truth before they vote? Who is stopping them getting on the net an doing a bit of research. In the states, less than 60% of people even bother to vote.

Not sure what your point is here. My point was that the decisions made in self interest of few people in the USA has caused huge problems for many. Are you agreeing with me? Did not a small amount of people making a huge amount of money to the detriment of the majority?Wiki page - Occupy Wall Street

quote:

---

The protests are against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, greed, as well as corruption, and the undue influence of corporationsparticularly from the financial services sectoron government. The protesters' slogan We are the 99% refers to the growing income and wealth inequality in the U.S. between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of the population

---

It seems that these folks (the 99%) are protesting because the 1% put their desires of the majority. They wanted shitloads of cash so they screwed heaps of people for it.But I am not talking about the USA an Americans. That is only one country and one group of people. I am talking about the planet Earth and the human species. From my limited knowledge of the US problem, if the few at the top put their nation and the people of their nation before their own desires to accumulate huge wealth, then they would not have gone down a dangerous path in the first place.The US problem has caused economic problems all over the world. How were the people in Ireland supposed to vote to prevent the US problem?Again, I know little and care little about the US problem. My concern is for the planet and the species. What about any of my posts makes you believe that I think things are fine? I actually think the exact opposite and act upon that concern. Refer to my posts on the "Whats the best solution for humanity" thread - Message 1. My concern is for the planet and the species. let me know which people you think are not covered by this grouping and I will alter my scope. This looks like you agree with me? Yes, lots of people got fucked over. If a few people had not been arseholes and put their own individual rights over that of these people, then they would still have their vacation time, their health benefits, their wages and their friends would still have jobs. well thats graphic. I dont have any problem with people being individual. I have a problem with people demanding their right to be individual in order to cause harm to the majority.I believe that the USA was one of the worlds most developed democracies when this problem started.And you are arguing that it is the fascists that will allow it to happen.That does not make sense. The problem in the USA came about not under a fascist form of government, but an extremely free democratic.It seems that you are argueing without realising this.You seem to be saying that fascist governments would lead to the people being blind and sheeplike and they would end up in a situation where their vacation time disappeared, their health benefits vanished, their wages stagnated, and their friends all got laid off.But that is what happened in the USA. In what is arguably the worlds most free and developed democratic system.

--double post deleted--Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

If people did not need to be controlled, there would be no police at all.Do you have the right to live in an environment protected by people like the police and military?

Hey Dogmafood,I agree with everything you have said. With a lot of things we have to force people to do the right thing. That is why we have the EPA.I will be the first to admit that I have no idea where to draw the line between forcing people to have no more than two children and forcing people to not dump radioactive waste into creeks and rivers.It seems that we all accept certain levels of force in order to keep our society running.We are not discussing a choice between force and no force, we are just discussing the level of pressure that we, as individuals are comfortable with.Most of us are forced to look after our pets or we will be punished by the RSPCA (of the US equivelant).I doubt very much that anyone will march in protest to stop the RSPCA forcing people to not abuse animals.pharmaceutical companies are forced to test their products and not lie about their benefits.I am happy that they are forced to do this and I believe that most people would agree. I dont have a better system. I suppose I am just pissed off by the volume of people who just dont give a shit. I discuss environmental issues with a lot of scientists, most people dont care enough to protect the planet they live in. They will have six kids, then vote in a politician who is against clean air legislation to save a few bucks on taxes.Every few days I walk through a park that has a large garbage filter running into a pond. The local council has to have this garbage filter shovelled out every time it rains because people dont care enough to not throw their rubbish on the ground.For a lot of things, we already exist in a top down system. We are told what to do on a lot of things. It annoys me that I cant ride my motorcycle at whatever speed I like. It is really fun to ride very fast. I am forced to ride at the speed limit to protect other people. Some things are wrong even when backed by popular consent. Slavery was wrong regardless of who approved. I suppose that if you include the slaves, then it was not backed by popular consent though. Often, laws are put in place before there is popular consent. People just get used to the idea.
Also, if popular consent was the requirement we would not pay taxes. No one likes it, but everyone has to do it. I agree with this as well. I am just unsure if it is fast enough.The green movement of the 70s is only just starting to filter through now. Thats a four decade delay.There are farmers in north Queensland who are still using destructive farming methods even though they can see the damage that salinity is doing on land near their house. Or even on parts of their own land. They can see it happening with their own eyes. They just dont care. The only way they will change is if they are forced to change. This is a huge problem. The other part of the problem is that spin doctors can control your 'education' with things other than the truth. Many people may think they are doing the right thing but they will be voting in the way they have been educated to vote. I was hoping they could be something like martial law in time of crisis. Brief, unpleasant for everyone concerned by necessary.