Can you tell the difference?


Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 2:35pm:

Quote: I think monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies are all bad. I value the freedom we have to criticise religion and government and the chance we have to participate in real elections. Be nice if we actually had that freedom but we dont. We get to vote between tweedledee and tweedledum and we didnt pick either of them. SOB

So why don't you tell us what the difference is?

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 3:01pm:

Can you tell the difference? Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 2:35pm: Quote: I think monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies are all bad. I value the freedom we have to criticise religion and government and the chance we have to participate in real elections. Be nice if we actually had that freedom but we dont. We get to vote between tweedledee and tweedledum and we didnt pick either of them. SOB

In reality and you can probably throw in Communism as well, there is probably little difference.

Very few, of us, really have the freedoms we think we have!

A dictatoraship you can't speak out against.
At times you can't vote them out.

They are imposed upon the populace.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace.

Like the financial system?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace.

Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy".

SOB

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 3:01pm: Can you tell the difference? Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 2:35pm: Quote: I think monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies are all bad. I value the freedom we have to criticise religion and government and the chance we have to participate in real elections. Be nice if we actually had that freedom but we dont. We get to vote between tweedledee and tweedledum and we didnt pick either of them. SOB In reality and you can probably throw in Communism as well, there is probably little difference. Very few, of us, really have the freedoms we think we have!

Saigon seems to be doing okay.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 6:28am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB

Can you explain how our freedom is an illusion? What is it we are not allowed to criticise, and why haven't we noticed?

How many choices do you think we get at election time?

the difference beteen democracy and dictatorship




freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 3:01pm:

Can you tell the difference?

All forms of government are a form of 'lawful' coercion.

Even democracy.

Democracy is the imposition of the will, of a majority, upon a minority [i.e. those who disagree with a majority view, on a particular issue].

In its purest form, a democracy is a dictatorship, by the majority.

Even so, i have no argument with the principle of democracy, as a form of government.




My main argument with regards democracy [as a political system], is that, imo, there should be some means to remove the right of idiots [and criminals, etc], to elect lawmakers.

I don't believe that there should a right of unearned 'universal suffrage' [i.e. the right of all adults to vote in political elections.].

I don't believe that unearned 'universal suffrage' can produce a wise lawmaking body, which can in the long term bring beneficial governance to a community.

Quote:

Even so, i have no argument with the principle of democracy, as a form of government.

Our government is not a democracy. We dont have a say in anything @ all except the choice between 2 parties. Thats it. If it was a "democracy" we would have more say. There would be referendums. ETc.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 6:28am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB

you may not like the democratic system we have SOB.
You do have the right to speak out against it, as you are, without fear of any repercussions.

You can also start up your own party to stand .

Neither of these facts exist under a dictatorship.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 1:10pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 6:28am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB you may not like the democratic system we have SOB. You do have the right to speak out against it, as you are, without fear of any repercussions. You can also start up your own party to stand . Neither of these facts exist under a dictatorship.

Cept if the dictatorship knows that it will make no difference.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 1:10pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 6:28am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB you may not like the democratic system we have SOB. You do have the right to speak out against it, as you are, without fear of any repercussions. You can also start up your own party to stand . Neither of these facts exist under a dictatorship.

Vote whoever you want you still get whats chosen for you.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 2:05pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 1:10pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 6:28am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB you may not like the democratic system we have SOB. You do have the right to speak out against it, as you are, without fear of any repercussions. You can also start up your own party to stand . Neither of these facts exist under a dictatorship. Vote whoever you want you still get whats chosen for you. SOB

Wow!

That is very defeatist of you SPOT.


;D

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 2:05pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 1:10pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 29th, 2012 at 6:28am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 8:59pm: A dictatoraship you can't speak out against. At times you can't vote them out. They are imposed upon the populace. Not all dictatorships are like that. you can have one that gives the  illusion of "freedom" like ours. Heh i think russia is an example of that but ppl are starting to wake up. Wont help though - maybe they will get an illusory 2 choices next time and be told that is "democracy". SOB you may not like the democratic system we have SOB. You do have the right to speak out against it, as you are, without fear of any repercussions. You can also start up your own party to stand . Neither of these facts exist under a dictatorship. Vote whoever you want you still get whats chosen for you. SOB

SPOT,

It is true that we do not enjoy real freedom,   ..........except;

If you truly wish to be free, then [you should always try to] act as though you are a free person.




So what do i mean ?

Don't allow others to define who you are, or what you can be.

Don't give them that power.




John Locke 1632-1704
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1242692863/0#0

Quote:

That is very defeatist of you SPOT.

Realist

SOB

Quote:

Our government is not a democracy. We dont have a say in anything @ all except the choice between 2 parties. Thats it.

I think you need to work on your counting skill spot.


Quote:

If it was a "democracy" we would have more say. There would be referendums.

That is a distinction between direct democracy and representative democracy. Do you think a referendum would give you more than two choices? Do you think Australia has no referendums?


Quote:

Vote whoever you want you still get whats chosen for you.

Now it makes a bit more sense. Spot I think you are confusing democracy with getting your way. There are still 20 million other people in this country. What we get is what is chosen by the majority of voters. That is what democracy is - not spot getting more say.


Quote:

Realist

I don't think your take on it is linked to reality at all. For starters, you can't count past two. Have you ever actually turned up to the polls and only had two choices?

You obviously dont know how it works. It doesnt matter who you vote for it is between those 2. Thats how it is. You can tick any box you want. It is not "having a say" just voting between 2 parties/people. They do whatever the heck they wanna do and do not care what the ppl want once they are in office. Look @ QLD and fluoride - there was a referendum and QLD said no so they did it anyway.

SOB

Ah, we all love you SOBbie

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 30^th, 2012 at 4:46am:

You obviously dont know how it works. It doesnt matter who you vote for it is between those 2. Thats how it is. You can tick any box you want. It is not "having a say" just voting between 2 parties/people. They do whatever the heck they wanna do and do not care what the ppl want once they are in office. Look @ QLD and fluoride - there was a referendum and QLD said no so they did it anyway. SOB

Spot why do you think we have two dominant parties?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 30^th, 2012 at 4:46am:

You obviously dont know how it works. It doesnt matter who you vote for it is between those 2. Thats how it is. You can tick any box you want. It is not "having a say" just voting between 2 parties/people. They do whatever the heck they wanna do and do not care what the ppl want once they are in office. Look @ QLD and fluoride - there was a referendum and QLD said no so they did it anyway. SOB

You are free to start your own party and oppose the two major parties without persecution. Something not given to people in non-democratic countries. Do you know Turkey is now locking up journalists and military leaders for speaking out against the government? Understand there is a difference.

So? Anyone can start a party - pay heaps of money and fees and Their preferences go to one of the 2. Whats the point of that?

SOB

If money is an issue, then go and earn it or try and get donations. The preferential system still doesn't mean we are a dictatorship. If we were you'd have been locked up long ago, along with about 30-40 other posters here, plus the thousands, if not millions, of dissenters from the populace.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 31^st, 2012 at 12:47pm:

If money is an issue, then go and earn it or try and get donations. The preferential system still doesn't mean we are a dictatorship. If we were you'd have been locked up long ago, along with about 30-40 other posters here, plus the thousands, if not millions, of dissenters from the populace.

Why do you think dictatorship means being locked up?

And dont be a dick the money is dead money you pay and pay and you get nowhere you are just paying the 2 parties.

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 31^st, 2012 at 11:53am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 30th, 2012 at 4:46am: You obviously dont know how it works. It doesnt matter who you vote for it is between those 2. Thats how it is. You can tick any box you want. It is not "having a say" just voting between 2 parties/people. They do whatever the heck they wanna do and do not care what the ppl want once they are in office. Look @ QLD and fluoride - there was a referendum and QLD said no so they did it anyway. SOB You are free to start your own party and oppose the two major parties without persecution. Something not given to people in non-democratic countries. Do you know Turkey is now locking up journalists and military leaders for speaking out against the government? Understand there is a difference.

exactly

Everyone in power will do what they can to protect that power.

Whether they protect it with an iron fist, or by erecting bureaucratic hurdle after bureaucratic hurdle, the intention and the end result are identical.

It's a bit facetious to say "just go out and do it" as if it were that easy.  No, you probably won't be killed for doing so in Australia, but you run a high risk of having your life taken all the same.  Wheres Pauline Hanson at now, since having the audacity to challenge the major parties stranglehold?  Where indeed - reduced to obscurity - her life as she knew it is gone.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 31^st, 2012 at 12:56pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 31st, 2012 at 12:47pm: If money is an issue, then go and earn it or try and get donations. The preferential system still doesn't mean we are a dictatorship. If we were you'd have been locked up long ago, along with about 30-40 other posters here, plus the thousands, if not millions, of dissenters from the populace. Why do you think dictatorship means being locked up? And dont be a dick the money is dead money you pay and pay and you get nowhere you are just paying the 2 parties. SOB

So even though you're free to criticize and whinge endlessly about the government, you still think it's a dictatorship.
Seriously, you need to go on a 6 month exchange program to North Korea, Cuba, or China and see where your recalcitrant nature gets you. 

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 31^st, 2012 at 12:34pm:

So? Anyone can start a party - pay heaps of money and fees and Their preferences go to one of the 2. Whats the point of that? SOB

It's called democracy spot. Are you equating your confusion over the functioning of preferential voting systems with dictatorship?

The preferences only flow after you have been excluded on the basis of being unpopular. Not being able to get anyone to vote for you is not the same thing as not being allowed to run for office.


Quote:

And dont be a dick the money is dead money you pay and pay and you get nowhere you are just paying the 2 parties.

Spot the reason you get nowhere is because no-one wants to vote for you. That is not the same thing as dictatorship. Rather, it is democracy in action.


Quote:

It's a bit facetious to say "just go out and do it" as if it were that easy.  No, you probably won't be killed for doing so in Australia, but you run a high risk of having your life taken all the same.

;D When was the last political assassination in Australia?

It really is that easy, if you have the support. If you don't have the support, it is impossible. This is a good thing. It is how democracy works.

The reason Pauline is not running for office is because no-one will vote for her any more. That's the extent of it. Even Hitler managed to milk jail time for political mileage. Pauline could too, if people supported her views.

Quote:

It's called democracy spot. Are you equating your confusion over the functioning of preferential voting systems with dictatorship?

You are doing it again dimwit. I didnt say this was a dictatorship. I said 1/2 joking that howards reign was a dictatorship because he had so much power like newman now. Not that its any use explaining anyfrigginthing to you.


Quote:

Spot the reason you get nowhere is because no-one wants to vote for you.

Now you are making out that I personally am running for office., What a dick you are.


Quote:

That is not the same thing as dictatorship. Rather, it is democracy in action.

Its 1 lil part of democracy which is all we have. Voting. Thats it. We have no other say in things. Not democracy. Not that democracy is such a good thing - we need to come up with something else.


Quote:

Pauline could too, if people supported her views.

Howard already implemented them though. She has been frigged over by the media - no return for her.

SOB

Quote:

The reason Pauline is not running for office is because no-one will vote for her any more.

And why won't they?  Might have something to do with the superbly orchestrated media smear campaign, topped with the "electoral fraud" cherry.

If you don't protect your power, you won't be in power very long....so you'll understand my incredulity that you will stand there, presumably with a straight face, and claim it's as simple as starting a new party. 

You could be the greatest leader of all time, with a master plan of justice and prosperity for all, but unless you dance along with the media/corporate tune you'll never get so much as a sniff. 


Who really elects officials in this country?  The people might place the ballots, but they are just proxies, acting out the wishes of their unlected puppetmasters in big media/big corporate.

You obviously didn't get my meaning when I said you would have your life taken.  As I overtly stated, you probably won't be killed, but by having your life taken, I mean having all that you've worked for taken away, to send a message that challenges to the old guards power will not be tolerated.   

Note that I'm not arguing that Australia is a dictatorship - what I am challenging is the assumption that "democracy" or the grotesque version of it we suffer under today, is necessarily better than a dictatorship. 

You will be metaphorically ass raped under both systems - Does it really matter if you're getting ass raped by one person for life, or by a new person every few years? 


Also note that I have no desire for the top job.  All I desire is to be left the bugger alone, to go about my lawful business, without the black hand of big government overreach tapping me on the shoulder.

Quote:

Note that I'm not arguing that Australia is a dictatorship - what I am challenging is the assumption that "democracy" or the grotesque version of it we suffer under today, is necessarily better than a dictatorship. You will be metaphorically ass raped under both systems - Does it really matter if you're getting ass raped by one person for life, or by a new person every few years?

Thats pretty much what im saying. As well as the fact that we didnt chose those 2 tokens we have to choose between either.

SOB

Quote:

Its 1 lil part of democracy which is all we have. Voting. Thats it. We have no other say in things. Not democracy.

Are you attempting to argue that representative democracy is not in fact democracy? If not, what is it?


Quote:

Not that democracy is such a good thing - we need to come up with something else.

;D


Quote:

And why won't they?  Might have something to do with the superbly orchestrated media smear campaign, topped with the "electoral fraud" cherry.

Or it could be because she is an empty headed bigot. The point is, she is free to run for office, has gotten more than her fair share of publicity, and people are still free to make up their own mind about her. There is nothing to stop her putting her own version of events forward. She chooses not to because every time she opens her mouth she loses support.


Quote:

Who really elects officials in this country?  The people might place the ballots, but they are just proxies, acting out the wishes of their unlected puppetmasters in big media/big corporate.

Can you elaborate on how these invisible string work?


Quote:

As I overtly stated, you probably won't be killed, but by having your life taken, I mean having all that you've worked for taken away, to send a message that challenges to the old guards power will not be tolerated.

Plenty of people are challenging the 'old guards'. Some of them are making a career out of it.


Quote:

Note that I'm not arguing that Australia is a dictatorship - what I am challenging is the assumption that "democracy" or the grotesque version of it we suffer under today, is necessarily better than a dictatorship. You will be metaphorically ass raped under both systems - Does it really matter if you're getting ass raped by one person for life, or by a new person every few years?

How about you think about it a bit more and get back to us?


Quote:

As well as the fact that we didnt chose those 2 tokens we have to choose between either.

But we did spot, and we choose them again at every election. Again, you are confusing democracy with having everyone agree with you. The vast majority of voters actually support the two major parties of their own free will.

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 28^th, 2012 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 3:01pm: Can you tell the difference? Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 28th, 2012 at 2:35pm: Quote: I think monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies are all bad. I value the freedom we have to criticise religion and government and the chance we have to participate in real elections. Be nice if we actually had that freedom but we dont. We get to vote between tweedledee and tweedledum and we didnt pick either of them. SOB In reality and you can probably throw in Communism as well, there is probably little difference. Very few, of us, really have the freedoms we think we have!

Very perceptive!
Nevertheless,Democracy is still the least evil of all regimes; the drawback of Democracy is, that we get the worst people elected to represent us.
How could Democracy be improved:
Here is my humble suggestion: every member of parliament should be obliged to answer every letter, e-mail or phone call he/she receives, and if the sender of the correspondence talks nonsense, the politician should have the courage to to tell him/her, that it is nonsense, but us, the voters should be be able to accept the truth.
Many would say , that the MP's are to busy to answer everything; the politicians spend about 90% of their time to keep themselves in power and the opposition out, and the last 10% to govern the country.
If they really do need more staff to reply to all correspondence, they should be given it, if it would improve the democratic system.
And we should write rather to polticians, than waste our time in forums.
This would apply to most of our politicians:
In the book “Unemployment forever or a Support Income System and Work For All”, by Allan McDonald, on page 142 (h) it is stated: Any means tested welfare system requires extensive and complex state control and regulation. Australia is slowly but surely moving towards the ultimate outcome of a means tested social welfare system-state control over finances, the savings, and the labours of the poorest in the community.

Have the politicians of Australia the know-how and will to change the tax and social system to be more egalitarian, or was the late Professor A.J.Marshall right when he wrote, as quoted in the book “Equality and Authority” by S Encel on page212: “Most Australian politicians, he wrote, aspire to parliamentary seats ‘to better their salary, to inflate their egos and feather their nests’.

Quote:

Or it could be because she is an empty headed bigot.

Not exactly empty - she had policies. Remember howard stole and implemented them!


Quote:

But we did spot, and we choose them again at every election. Again, you are confusing democracy with having everyone agree with you. The vast majority of voters actually support the two major parties of their own free will.

Of course they do because they are the only choices. Its all geared around 2 parties and thats it. Divide and conquer also all these ppl that are "liberal" or "labour" that object to the other just because of the name when they are the same. Its 1984 alright.

SOB

dictators defend (often violently) their hold on power.
Against any desires by the population, they are supremely resistant to change.

aka  islam

freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2012 at 7:41pm:

Or it could be because she is an empty headed bigot.

Having never met the woman, I think we can safely say that perception is what you've been led to believe, and not by accident either. 


Quote:

The point is, she is free to run for office, has gotten more than her fair share of publicity,

yes, negative publicity.  Not all publicity is good publicity.


Quote:

and people are still free to make up their own mind about her.

Yes, based on whatever information is made avilable to them.  Therefore, those who control the medium control the message.  Who controls the message FD?


Quote:

There is nothing to stop her putting her own version of events forward.

Sure, just so long as she starts her own media company, and it becomes more popualr than the stablished ones.  In other words, no bloody chance. 


Quote:

She chooses not to because every time she opens her mouth she loses support.

She told you it's her choice did she?


Quote:

Can you elaborate on how these invisible string work?

No, but anybody who works in advertising could.  Or don't you belive advertising/PR has any effect on people?  A bit odd that almost half a trillion dollars will be spent on something that doesn't work ina year, wouldn't you say?

http://www.plunkettresearch.com/advertising-branding-market-research/industry-statistics


Quote:

Plenty of people are challenging the 'old guards'. Some of them are making a career out of it.

Oh yeah?  Who? What aspects are they *ahem* challenging?



Quote:

How about you think about it a bit more and get back to us?

Whats to think about?  How about you give reason for reconsideration, instead of the naive, obstinate pedantry you're serving up here?

We have a system of government essentially run by two parties who work together to keep down threats and minimize public participation and control power.