Democractic Socialism?

[ViolentPanda]

Sorry but i understood your view to be in favour of an unelected judiciary?

And I know exactly how you "understand" that. You "understand" that to be the case because I had a go at you because you proposed an elected judiciary, and the reason why I had a go at you is because that's as far as your idea went, a case of "oh, let's have an elected judiciary", no follow-up about who you'd choose to elect from, no ideas on how people would be chosen, nothing, nada, zip, zilch.

You make the error of mistaking criticism of your usual ill-thought out "reasoning" with criticism of the idea itself.

Have a look back at the thread we discussed this on and you'll see that I'm right.

 

[audiotech]

But if the Leadership doesnt reflect the views and aspirations of working class people, what use are they to working class people or anyone for that matter?

I'm suspicious of the phrase working class intellectuals.
What Who is an Intellectual.

You're right to be suspicious.

The leadership must come from the working class - be organic to it and so reflect it's very aspirations.

What who is an intellectual? Not in the sense as it now; i.e a separate class, but one part of large network in a movement whose aim is, as mentioned, to create new social formations. The existence of these intellectuals must be fundamentally transformed. Only then can their relationship to the working class be transformed.

 

[tbaldwin]

And I know exactly how you "understand" that. You "understand" that to be the case because I had a go at you because you proposed an elected judiciary, and the reason why I had a go at you is because that's as far as your idea went, a case of "oh, let's have an elected judiciary", no follow-up about who you'd choose to elect from, no ideas on how people would be chosen, nothing, nada, zip, zilch.

You make the error of mistaking criticism of your usual ill-thought out "reasoning" with criticism of the idea itself.

Have a look back at the thread we discussed this on and you'll see that I'm right.

Thats just waffle...as usual....
I am for an elected judiciary....Are you for or against one.....And i think its preety fucking obvious that i think everyone (Over 18) should have a vote...
So stop trying to be clever and hide behind your normal waffle and tell us if you think the Judiciary should be elected or appointed?

 

[scawenb]

The structure of society and the form in which political power manifests are linked, though.
We currently have a system that only allows "weak" democracy, so power elites, whether left, right or "third way" are able to over-ride, set aside or otherwise ignore much of what is put before them that they don't approve of. It is dispiritingly easy, for example, for the mandarins of the various govt depts to manipulate policy into failing.

YEs but I think it is the system as a whole that needs changing not the mandarins or elites. They can be a democratic and well-meaning as tey like but they can do nothing to change the socio-economic and geo-political realities. I've never thought that capitalists exploit people because they are nasty people but that if they didn't exploit people they would cease to be capitalists.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Thats just waffle...as usual....

Right, so anything you can't understand or work out for yourself (even though I've told you my views before) is waffle, is it?

You're always so quick to abuse, and so very fucking slow contributing anything of substance, balders.

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.

I am for an elected judiciary....Are you for or against one.....And i think its preety fucking obvious that i think everyone (Over 18) should have a vote...
So stop trying to be clever and hide behind your normal waffle and tell us if you think the Judiciary should be elected or appointed?

I've already told you at least twice before that I'm for, but with the proviso that the criteria by which people can put themselves forward/be put forward to stand aren't exclusionary in term of class, race, religion, or education. The ability to neutrally assess cases is the only ability needed.

As for "trying to be clever", I leave that to you. Who knows, one of these days you might even succeed.

 

[ViolentPanda]

YEs but I think it is the system as a whole that needs changing not the mandarins or elites.

I agree, but is it better to dismantle from the inside out, or from the outside in?

They can be a democratic and well-meaning as tey like but they can do nothing to change the socio-economic and geo-political realities.

Of course not, and the sop of weak democracy and benevolent governance are generally window-dressing to make the social and economic realities less unacceptable, rather than being actual born of genuine concern for individuals.

I've never thought that capitalists exploit people because they are nasty people but that if they didn't exploit people they would cease to be capitalists.

What we have to bear in mind, I believe, is that exploiters will always exploit to and past the limit of what is allowed. If we do bear that in mind then that should inform the way we approach them.

 

[scawenb]

I agree, but is it better to dismantle from the inside out, or from the outside in?

I don't think its possible to change from within - even if I did run the civil service or became PM.

What we have to bear in mind, I believe, is that exploiters will always exploit to and past the limit of what is allowed. If we do bear that in mind then that should inform the way we approach them.

The limit of what is allowed by the structure of society will be exploited to its limit and can't go beyond. If you over-expolit the limit of the workers they will not be able to reproduce economically and you will go bust - if they don't kill you first. If you do not exploit enough then someone else will.

 

[tbaldwin]

Right, so anything you can't understand or work out for yourself (even though I've told you my views before) is waffle, is it?

You're always so quick to abuse, and so very fucking slow contributing anything of substance, balders.

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.


I've already told you at least twice before that I'm for, but with the proviso that the criteria by which people can put themselves forward/be put forward to stand aren't exclusionary in term of class, race, religion, or education. The ability to neutrally assess cases is the only ability needed.

As for "trying to be clever", I leave that to you. Who knows, one of these days you might even succeed.

Totally turgid waffle.....
Who is going to decide who is going to neutrally assess?? You or one of your old bosses Michael Howard or Anne Widdecombe?
Just plain bollocks.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Totally turgid waffle.....

If you say so.

Answered your pathetic question though, didn't it?

Who is going to decide who is going to neutrally assess??

The people.
That's how electoral systems work, bollock-brain.

You or one of your old bosses Michael Howard or Anne Widdecombe?
Just plain bollocks.

You're repeating yourself.

You really are a sad wanker, aren't you?

You've nothing worthwhile to say so you slip into "snide" mode.

What a plonker you are, Tommy.

 

[tbaldwin]

You're repeating yourself.

You really are a sad wanker, aren't you?

You've nothing worthwhile to say so you slip into "snide" mode.

What a plonker you are, .

Thanks for that.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don't think its possible to change from within - even if I did run the civil service or became PM.

Ah. I think that it is possible to change, I just don't think it's possible for the present institutions to change themselves enough to make a significant difference.

The limit of what is allowed by the structure of society will be exploited to its limit and can't go beyond.

I was referring to the legal limit, and as we know from countless health and safety cases down the years that the HSE has existed, the exploiters are always willing to push beyond that legal limit.

If you over-expolit the limit of the workers they will not be able to reproduce economically and you will go bust - if they don't kill you first. If you do not exploit enough then someone else will.

And there's the crapper that Robert Tressell wrote so well about 100 years ago, under the present system the "sweater" have "Hobson's choice"; "sweat" or "bust".