So just have "our" representatives decide for us?But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.
Only a cartographical expression of (extrapolated) polling numbers, I know, but rarely has such a map so starkly screamed political failure.
That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.So just have "our" representatives decide for us?
That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.
So what are you suggesting then?That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.
Well it will do for starters. Control of the MoP is the aim.Fine by me. Is that it then?
Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy. The fact that the same survey can produce completely different results by switching between two counting systems both widely considered legitimate shows that the results of a vote can be largely arbitrary.So what are you suggesting then?
Of course it is. But the answer is not to reduce democracy but to increase it.Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy.
I'm not saying anything should be reduced. I'm saying that looking at the result of a general election, or a vote in Parliament, or a referendum and calling it the will of the people is, at least part of the time, a mistake, or possibly a lie.Of course it is. But the answer is not to reduce democracy but to increase it.
Benevolent dictatorship.the alternative being what?
serious question.
Green dictatorship.Benevolent dictatorship.
Bowling greenGreen dictatorship.
Not really. If you're offering a choice between more than two options, taking the one that is the favourite of more people to be the winner doesn't make much sense, particularly when in this case two of the options are versions of leave but only one is a version of remain. It's not arbitrary to use a preference system to get your result - it's the way of getting the least-hated option as the winner. In most votes of this nature, 'least hated' is probably the best you can do. But this is also an illustration of how the first vote wasn't a mandate for the various things that have been proposed to have been mandated by it - particularly the ending of free movement from/to the EU.Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy. The fact that the same survey can produce completely different results by switching between two counting systems both widely considered legitimate shows that the results of a vote can be largely arbitrary.
Well it will do for starters. Control of the MoP is the aim.
Regardless of the UK leaving the EU or not, greater democracy has to be something socialists/communists/anarchists push for.I almost certainly dream similar dreams - but - how we use Brexit to gain control of the Means of Production .. I mean exactly how, in stages .. I'm missing that bit. It's actually my number 1 gripe with this whole mess.
We just have a tNo it isn't - and neither is the leave shit, outside of eg the Morning Star's take on it all. The people chiefly responsible for the planning, promotion and execution of Leave / Brexit, they're not on our side. We're letting them get away with this egregious fuckery because we don't want to be in the EU, but what we're going to gain from it apart from some abstract nouns is truly a mystery to me.
And as for how we get from ''here'' to ''there'', well.
But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.
My start point on that would have been acknowledging the need for a hard border (mostly hedge (thus free movement of wild life (snakes and that sort of thing) but hard enough to stop findus horse lasagne. Promise to bring people doing bat shit things with wood chip burners under close examination of the law and as to the vexing complex long standing argument argument at the core of the troubles....What was your plan for NI? Are you sure your plans were ignored rather than rejected?
But neither party even have a clear idea of what they intend to do next.an extension of A50 in order to allow for a general election and calling a general election. That way, everyone can campaign giving a clear idea of what they intend to do next: cancel brexit (which is very likely to be an option from Monday), hold a second ref (which I think would not be a very popular option), or go back in to renegotiate a new deal (with details of what you'll be trying to achieve).