Australian Politics Forum - Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #30 - Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:58pm

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:47pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:19am:

I call it an aristocracy. You can call it what you want. You say Australia copied "the best" (whatever that means. One mans meat is another mans poison as they say) of the US UK and Swiss systems but of course they were not free to create any system. The creators were Australia's aristocrats themselves and even if any were inclined to buck the system they couldn't because they had to create a system that was approved by the UK power elite, the monarchy/aristocracy. And as for the system being successful one thing is certain. 230 yrs of modern representative government has demonstrated clearly that it is a totally incapable vehicle for delivering democracy. It cant do it. It doesn't work. The evidence is unequivocal in this respect.

Australia, like the US has never had an aristocracy. The British Parliamentary system, with a written constitution and a referential system produced the system we have today. It was created by Australian politicians. Politicians who referred the Constitution to the people and people approved it and the result was Federation in 1901 on 1 January which brought the separate colonies together and created the nation of Australia.

I call them an aristocracy because that's what they were in effect. The constitution was drawn up by the power elite to create a Westminster style of Government. They may have gotten away with creating a congressional style of Govt (but I doubt it) but they most certainly would never have been allowed to create a real democratic style of Govt because ultimately it had to be approved by the Power Elite back in England. That was the reality. The common folk had no real role in deciding what the constitution would contain and they didnt expect to. But its now 2021. We are much more aware now than we were then. The constitution clearly has not deliver democracy because it rarely gives effect to what the majority wants. The Aust constitution like the US constitution is well past its use by date and its time to trade it in for a real democracy.

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #31 - Feb 14^th, 2021 at 11:53pm

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:36pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 9:58am:

No. It was all about party politics. And I mean all parties labor, Libs, Greens. Both labor and Libs delayed the Bill because neither wanted to go into an election fronting as the party that would enact gay marriage because they knew even though it had majority support there were still many on both sides of politics opposed who would threaten them at the seat level. There was only one reason for the delay. To suit the parties, not the people. Indeed it was one of the more blatant examples of how undemocratic Australia really is

Errr, the ALP and the Greens did go into elections backing Gay Marriage. Your memory is faulty.

I said "they didn't want to" I didn't say they didn't eventually. But from the Rudd Govt in 2007 it took 10 years before gay marriage was enacted and the delay was about one thing; serving the interests of the political parties over what the people wanted.

What follows is a brief excerpt of the history from Wikipedia (Whats it tell you when you read that Gillard opposed the legislation. Clearly that was entirely about her political survival and had zero to do with what the people wanted. Penny Wong who is in a same sex relationship was the same from recollection. And that's the rub. The system is not about democracy essentially because so called "representatives" always put their interests ahead of what their constituents want.):-

"The Labor governments of Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard (2007–13) were divided on the issue. Despite passing a resolution at the party's national conference in December 2011 to support same-sex marriage, the party held a conscience vote when two private member's bill's to legalise same-sex marriage were debated in the Parliament in September 2012. The legislation was opposed by Prime Minister Gillard and several other Labor MPs, as well as by the opposition Coalition, led by Tony Abbott. The first bill failed in the House of Representatives by 98 votes to 42 and a similar bill was rejected by the Senate by 41 votes to 26.

The Abbott Government (2013–15) then resolved in August 2015 to hold a national vote on same-sex marriage, sometime after the 2016 federal election, in the form of either a plebiscite or constitutional referendum.This policy was maintained by the Turnbull Government (2015–18) after Malcolm Turnbull (a supporter of same-sex marriage) replaced Abbott as Prime Minister following a leadership challenge. The bill to establish the plebiscite (which would have been held on 11 February 2017) passed the House of Representatives by 76 votes to 67 on 20 October 2016, though was rejected by the Senate the following month by 33 votes to 29, after the Government failed to attract the support of the opposition Labor Party, minor party the Greens and several Senate crossbenchers.

Despite initially suggesting the Government had "no plans to take any other measures on this issue", Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull came under increasing pressure to change policy and allow a conscience vote in the Parliament (only because the election was now behind him. My words not Wikipedia's) . Consequently, at a Liberal party room meeting on 7 August 2017, the Government resolved to conduct a voluntary postal survey on the matter later in the year. The Government stated the survey would only occur in the event the Senate again rejected the legislation enabling the plebiscite, which happened on 9 August 2017. The survey was held between 12 September and 7 November 2017 and returned a 61.6% "Yes" vote in favour of same-sex marriage.[47] The Government responded by confirming it would facilitate the passage of a private member's bill legalising same-sex marriage before the end of the year.

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #32 - Feb 15^th, 2021 at 12:11pm

Frank wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 8:15pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:47pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:19am:

I call it an aristocracy. You can call it what you want. You say Australia copied "the best" (whatever that means. One mans meat is another mans poison as they say) of the US UK and Swiss systems but of course they were not free to create any system. The creators were Australia's aristocrats themselves and even if any were inclined to buck the system they couldn't because they had to create a system that was approved by the UK power elite, the monarchy/aristocracy. And as for the system being successful one thing is certain. 230 yrs of modern representative government has demonstrated clearly that it is a totally incapable vehicle for delivering democracy. It cant do it. It doesn't work. The evidence is unequivocal in this respect.

Australia, like the US has never had an aristocracy. The British Parliamentary system, with a written constitution and a referential system produced the system we have today. It was created by Australian politicians. Politicians who referred the Constitution to the people and people approved it and the result was Federation in 1901 on 1 January which brought the separate colonies together and created the nation of Australia.

Yet you, dickheaddle that you are, refer to the Liberal Party as the 'Tories'.

That is that is what the so-called "liberal party" has become, Soren. The Tories control the party and have done so since Howard became their leader. You would prefer the Nazi party, I assume? Roll Eyes

Quote:

That's how stupid AND lyingly dishonest you are, Bbbwian. You do not have an honest bone in your body. You'd die rather than be truthful.

But then that IS your role in life, to be a lying, despicable hypochrite. You are living it, with bells on, old Dad-o'-Turd.

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #33 - Feb 15^th, 2021 at 12:16pm

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:32pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:43pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:07am:

Its just fantasy to say that we ended up with a system controlled by the people. We cant decide sh#t. Most of us knew that Howard was lying about WMDs but we were powerless to stop our involvement in the war. Privatization where the peoples assets were just simply taken from them was never put to a vote. Mass immigration has changed the face and make up of this country which people continuously protested over the years and notwithstanding how fundamental a change it would make to the country the people had absolutely no power to stop it because its not what the power Elite wanted.

You live in a fantasy world it appears. We weren't "powerless" we, the people had all the power but the Government exercised it's powers under the Constitution to control Foreign Policy. Howard actually opened it up to the Parliament but it was a debate and the Parliament didn't have the power to prevent the Government undertaking it's actions except by passing a no confidence motion. The Parliament could have passed a vote of no confidence and forced an election but it didn't because the Tories controlled it. The people have the power of their votes and until you can convince sufficient numbers to elect the opposition, nothing will change. Roll Eyes

None of that makes any sense. First you say we had all the power and then we really didnt have the power. You're being absurd. The federal election was in Nov 2001 & the Iraq war was in 2003 and not in contemplation (certainly not by the Australian people) when they voted. Thereafter the decision was made by the Govt and the people were powerless to stop it. The fact that the Govt and Parliamentary processes, as determined by the Constitution, were such that the people could not stop the Government going to war makes my point. The constitution was never designed to give effect to what the majority of the people want, not even in a matter as important and of life changing significance as whether to go to war or not. And to pretend that somehow its all OK because the constitution lets you number some boxes every 3 years to choose the nannies who will be making the decisions instead of you is about as servile as it gets.

As I said, you live in a fantasy world. The power of the people is to elect a new government and dismiss the old. The power of the Parliament is to either support or dismiss the Government and force an election. The Government powers are defined in the Constitution. Until you make sense and work within the Constitution and understand how it and politics work, you're talking rubbish. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #34 - Feb 15^th, 2021 at 12:17pm

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:58pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:47pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:19am:

I call it an aristocracy. You can call it what you want. You say Australia copied "the best" (whatever that means. One mans meat is another mans poison as they say) of the US UK and Swiss systems but of course they were not free to create any system. The creators were Australia's aristocrats themselves and even if any were inclined to buck the system they couldn't because they had to create a system that was approved by the UK power elite, the monarchy/aristocracy. And as for the system being successful one thing is certain. 230 yrs of modern representative government has demonstrated clearly that it is a totally incapable vehicle for delivering democracy. It cant do it. It doesn't work. The evidence is unequivocal in this respect.

Australia, like the US has never had an aristocracy. The British Parliamentary system, with a written constitution and a referential system produced the system we have today. It was created by Australian politicians. Politicians who referred the Constitution to the people and people approved it and the result was Federation in 1901 on 1 January which brought the separate colonies together and created the nation of Australia.

I call them an aristocracy because that's what they were in effect. The constitution was drawn up by the power elite to create a Westminster style of Government. They may have gotten away with creating a congressional style of Govt (but I doubt it) but they most certainly would never have been allowed to create a real democratic style of Govt because ultimately it had to be approved by the Power Elite back in England. That was the reality. The common folk had no real role in deciding what the constitution would contain and they didnt expect to. But its now 2021. We are much more aware now than we were then. The constitution clearly has not deliver democracy because it rarely gives effect to what the majority wants. The Aust constitution like the US constitution is well past its use by date and its time to trade it in for a real democracy.

The founding fathers of Australian democracy created a democratic system of Government. QED. Cool

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49407
At my desk.

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #35 - Feb 15^th, 2021 at 6:46pm

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:01pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 6:57pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 1:28pm:

Quote:

They're the parliamentary members who do what they're told

Who tells them?

Hopeless! You're going around in circles. Scroll back. This is the 2nd time you've asked and it was answered the 1st time.

Let me guess, a talking machine whispers in their ear?

Jest is this "party machine" thing just a lazy excuse for you to make up whatever conspiracy you want?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #36 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 15^th, 2021 at 12:16pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:32pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:43pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:07am:

Its just fantasy to say that we ended up with a system controlled by the people. We cant decide sh#t. Most of us knew that Howard was lying about WMDs but we were powerless to stop our involvement in the war. Privatization where the peoples assets were just simply taken from them was never put to a vote. Mass immigration has changed the face and make up of this country which people continuously protested over the years and notwithstanding how fundamental a change it would make to the country the people had absolutely no power to stop it because its not what the power Elite wanted.

You live in a fantasy world it appears. We weren't "powerless" we, the people had all the power but the Government exercised it's powers under the Constitution to control Foreign Policy. Howard actually opened it up to the Parliament but it was a debate and the Parliament didn't have the power to prevent the Government undertaking it's actions except by passing a no confidence motion. The Parliament could have passed a vote of no confidence and forced an election but it didn't because the Tories controlled it. The people have the power of their votes and until you can convince sufficient numbers to elect the opposition, nothing will change. Roll Eyes

None of that makes any sense. First you say we had all the power and then we really didnt have the power. You're being absurd. The federal election was in Nov 2001 & the Iraq war was in 2003 and not in contemplation (certainly not by the Australian people) when they voted. Thereafter the decision was made by the Govt and the people were powerless to stop it. The fact that the Govt and Parliamentary processes, as determined by the Constitution, were such that the people could not stop the Government going to war makes my point. The constitution was never designed to give effect to what the majority of the people want, not even in a matter as important and of life changing significance as whether to go to war or not. And to pretend that somehow its all OK because the constitution lets you number some boxes every 3 years to choose the nannies who will be making the decisions instead of you is about as servile as it gets.

As I said, you live in a fantasy world. The power of the people is to elect a new government and dismiss the old. The power of the Parliament is to either support or dismiss the Government and force an election. The Government powers are defined in the Constitution. Until you make sense and work within the Constitution and understand how it and politics work, you're talking rubbish. Roll Eyes

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 16^th, 2021 at 8:16am by Jest »

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #37 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:59am

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 15^th, 2021 at 12:17pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:58pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 7:47pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 14^th, 2021 at 10:19am:

I call it an aristocracy. You can call it what you want. You say Australia copied "the best" (whatever that means. One mans meat is another mans poison as they say) of the US UK and Swiss systems but of course they were not free to create any system. The creators were Australia's aristocrats themselves and even if any were inclined to buck the system they couldn't because they had to create a system that was approved by the UK power elite, the monarchy/aristocracy. And as for the system being successful one thing is certain. 230 yrs of modern representative government has demonstrated clearly that it is a totally incapable vehicle for delivering democracy. It cant do it. It doesn't work. The evidence is unequivocal in this respect.

Australia, like the US has never had an aristocracy. The British Parliamentary system, with a written constitution and a referential system produced the system we have today. It was created by Australian politicians. Politicians who referred the Constitution to the people and people approved it and the result was Federation in 1901 on 1 January which brought the separate colonies together and created the nation of Australia.

I call them an aristocracy because that's what they were in effect. The constitution was drawn up by the power elite to create a Westminster style of Government. They may have gotten away with creating a congressional style of Govt (but I doubt it) but they most certainly would never have been allowed to create a real democratic style of Govt because ultimately it had to be approved by the Power Elite back in England. That was the reality. The common folk had no real role in deciding what the constitution would contain and they didnt expect to. But its now 2021. We are much more aware now than we were then. The constitution clearly has not deliver democracy because it rarely gives effect to what the majority wants. The Aust constitution like the US constitution is well past its use by date and its time to trade it in for a real democracy.

The founding fathers of Australian democracy created a democratic system of Government. QED. Cool

Yes Ive answered this in my last post. The "Dear Leader" our "Founding Fathers". Penny dropping yet?

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #38 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #39 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 1:20pm

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again.

That's precisely what I would expect an indoctrinated person to say. You ignore the obvious facts (the Australian people are afforded no self determination under this constitution - see the points above which you have not addressed) & simply parrot what you've been told. Its also no surprise that at this point in the discussion you rely more heavily on emojis, circular arguments (eg Aust is a democracy so how could it not be a democracy) Bart Simpson come backs (it is too a democracy) and simple assertion instead of giving reasons. A sure sign that you cant find the reasons to back up the claims you parrot. Oh and I do compare the US and UK. Their systems are very similar and also not democracies.

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #40 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 3:35pm

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 1:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again.

That's precisely what I would expect an indoctrinated person to say. You ignore the obvious facts (the Australian people are afforded no self determination under this constitution - see the points above which you have not addressed) & simply parrot what you've been told. Its also no surprise that at this point in the discussion you rely more heavily on emojis, circular arguments (eg Aust is a democracy so how could it not be a democracy) Bart Simpson come backs (it is too a democracy) and simple assertion instead of giving reasons. A sure sign that you cant find the reasons to back up the claims you parrot. Oh and I do compare the US and UK. Their systems are very similar and also not democracies.

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #41 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:53pm

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 3:35pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 1:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again.

That's precisely what I would expect an indoctrinated person to say. You ignore the obvious facts (the Australian people are afforded no self determination under this constitution - see the points above which you have not addressed) & simply parrot what you've been told. Its also no surprise that at this point in the discussion you rely more heavily on emojis, circular arguments (eg Aust is a democracy so how could it not be a democracy) Bart Simpson come backs (it is too a democracy) and simple assertion instead of giving reasons. A sure sign that you cant find the reasons to back up the claims you parrot. Oh and I do compare the US and UK. Their systems are very similar and also not democracies.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223...

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

lol!!! I knew you'd respond with the yawning emoji. You have a history. Every one knows that means you've lost the argument. What I suggest is that you do some reading about what democracy actually is before you enage in a discussion thats way over your head. And another suggestion, venture outside of your echo chamaber and do some independant thinking. It will have you questioning the "Dear Leader" and the "Founding Fathers"
and equip you with the ability to bring something worthwhile to a discussion

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42368

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #42 - Feb 16^th, 2021 at 10:11pm

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 3:35pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 1:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again.

That's precisely what I would expect an indoctrinated person to say. You ignore the obvious facts (the Australian people are afforded no self determination under this constitution - see the points above which you have not addressed) & simply parrot what you've been told. Its also no surprise that at this point in the discussion you rely more heavily on emojis, circular arguments (eg Aust is a democracy so how could it not be a democracy) Bart Simpson come backs (it is too a democracy) and simple assertion instead of giving reasons. A sure sign that you cant find the reasons to back up the claims you parrot. Oh and I do compare the US and UK. Their systems are very similar and also not democracies.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223...

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

lol!!! I knew you'd respond with the yawning emoji. You have a history. Every one knows that means you've lost the argument. What I suggest is that you do some reading about what democracy actually is before you enage in a discussion thats way over your head. And another suggestion, venture outside of your echo chamaber and do some independant thinking. It will have you questioning the "Dear Leader" and the "Founding Fathers"
and equip you with the ability to bring something worthwhile to a discussion

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Jest

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: male

Re: Congress vs. Normal People By Dan Gelernter
Reply #43 - Feb 17^th, 2021 at 12:27am

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 10:11pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:53pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 3:35pm:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 1:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 11:08am:

Jest wrote on Feb 16^th, 2021 at 7:56am:

Your strategy of accusing people of what you do to deflect from the illogicality of your position doesn't work. You're the one dreaming you have power you don't, which makes you the fantasist. You can't substitute wishful thinking for logic and make it be true. Look, just because North Korea has a Constitution like Australia and calls itself a democracy, like Australia, (Its official name is The Democratic People's Republic of Korea), doesn't mean those things make it a democracy. You have to go beyond what people tell you and examine the actual political arrangements that the constitution enforces in order to determine whether it is in fact a democracy and the glaring truth is that the Australian/American constitutions DO NOT allow for any real self determination by the people. Indeed those constitutions prevent it. There is very little in 230 years of so called "Representative" Government that the people have been allowed to decide. Again, in Australia, monumental issues that have had devastating long term impacts on the people were never decided by the people and in most cases it was never even put to them as an option. Vietnam, the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, privitisation, immigration, trade deals that have systematically shipped many of our jobs to slave wage paying countries and destroyed our manufacturing base. Even the plebiscite on gay marriage we were told would be advisory only. Contemplate that for a moment. Our so called agents are saying that they can override what we want and decide against what we want. Only the most servile mind could talk themselves into thinking that is democratic. Now I know we laugh at the North Koreans when they speak of their "Dear Leader" but really you need to wake up from your fantasy because calling them our "Funding Fathers" puts you in the same boat.

Comparing a nation where all power is invested in the leader versus a real democracy where it is vested across several institutions reveal how much of a fantasy you live in, Jest. You are failing dismally in this argument. The DPRK is a faux democracy ruled by a dictator. Australia is a real democracy ruled by the people for the people through the election of representatives and the appointment of various individuals in institutions. You would be better off comparing us to the UK or the US. Try again.

That's precisely what I would expect an indoctrinated person to say. You ignore the obvious facts (the Australian people are afforded no self determination under this constitution - see the points above which you have not addressed) & simply parrot what you've been told. Its also no surprise that at this point in the discussion you rely more heavily on emojis, circular arguments (eg Aust is a democracy so how could it not be a democracy) Bart Simpson come backs (it is too a democracy) and simple assertion instead of giving reasons. A sure sign that you cant find the reasons to back up the claims you parrot. Oh and I do compare the US and UK. Their systems are very similar and also not democracies.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223...

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

lol!!! I knew you'd respond with the yawning emoji. You have a history. Every one knows that means you've lost the argument. What I suggest is that you do some reading about what democracy actually is before you enage in a discussion thats way over your head. And another suggestion, venture outside of your echo chamaber and do some independant thinking. It will have you questioning the "Dear Leader" and the "Founding Fathers"
and equip you with the ability to bring something worthwhile to a discussion

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223...

As a troll you are a failure, Jest. Tsk, tsk.

I must admit Im quite amused by the desperate psychology behind your yawning emoji. Its obviously an attempt at saving face but it doesnt really make sense does it? You're pretending to yawn to imply you're not interested but you keep posting it because your so desperate to save face which of course means you are interested. Actually the dynamics of this is quite interesting. On the one hand you're desperate to save face but on the other you know that with each post of the yawning emoji you look more foolish. So which will win out? Your need to save face, compelling you to post yet another emoji or your embarrasement at having to post another emoji. OK counting. You're up to 2 so far.

Back to top

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

IP Logged