What country has the best political setup?
- Thread starter ska invita
- Start date
Must be the combination of the weeks of darkness and the unicameral parliamentary system that pushes them over the edge.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
Someone proposed doing that here. A comedy show jumped on the idea and managed to get more than enough signatures to force a referendum on having the leader of the party's name legally changed from Stockwell Day to Doris Day. It was good for a few laughs but did show us all how easily it could be abused.
I'm not sure what the official reason for not doing it was, but it was probably the cost of the entire exercise.
Right now, if there is something important that the nation should vote on, the government puts it on the ballots of the next election. I've voted on these things at all three levels of government. This way costs less and, I would expect, has higher participation level.
Good link. China's political freedoms are just so far behind the improvement in everything else.
It's going to be interesting seeing where it goes next.
Um, all countries have very high ethnic populations. 100% in fact. Each and every country. That's a linguistic fact.
(Will people please stop misusing the word 'ethnic'?
)
lobster
Well-Known Member
Denmark has monarch as the head of state, an elected president would make it a lot better.
Denmark military service is biased towards woman.
The church and state is still together, something that Sweden got rid of a few years ago, which makes my Danish friend envious .
As a country I could live in Denmark, my friend lives in Selkeborg , Jutland which is full of low hills and woods .
Its interesting you say that everyone was quiet in Sweden, that is actually what I want. I find England, well London where I live too noisy. Obviously it does not top the noise that Americans make .
Finland appeals to me too , they are noticeably quiet too.
Canada is a interesting country as well . Its a place I could move to as well.
They are in many ways opposite to their neighbours .
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
The question was "what country has the best political setup". Not what country has the most economic equality or best government machinery or the nicest democratic structure. When it comes to freedom of speech and freedom from persecution and not getting killed for your politics this is a pretty good country. This is a country in which people like tbaldwin can live and speak out in relative safety.
As far as elected MPs consistently overriding views of the general public, that is what you'd expect in a representative democracy, especially as there isn't any kind of scientific means of establishing the views of everyone in the general public. If you want a vote on who owns the Banks, the media and businesses generally, get your MP to move a Bill in the Commons. He or she will probably want the Government to own them. Do you? What about Mrs Miggins down the road? Or her neice, Sharon, aged 3?
And as you say, the UK is probably one of the best countries to live in. I would humbly suggest that's a good test of the best political setup.
The reason why I posted at all was that the original poster said "obviously" not the UK. All I wanted to point out was that there is nothing obvious about it. Perhaps it is an issue that so many people here feel safe and secure in dissing their own country. Try doing that in most countries in the world and see where it gets you.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
We all have regular elections, but can you imagine the other countries dealing with a real political test, like as an emergency such as the one we experienced over N Ireland in the restrained way the UK did? The others would either blooter the populations of the affected areas, or give up and sell out the people who didn't agree with the insurrectionists. Or both.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
what utter cock! ooh how brilliantly the Uk dealt with the problem that it created...ignoring it for decades then making it even worse! Pure genius. I'm sure most irish catholics (hell, AND protestants) would share your wonderfully rose tinted view of the way they were dealt with.
(oh, and the second paragraph of your previous post is barely comprehensible gibberish)
clusterflux
Ham handed knee jerk
The United States of America easily has the best setup. There is no question. The truth of the matter is that "some intellectually challenged or special" folks had taken control of the government and we will have things sorted out in a few months. Just a slight blip was all...
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Historical blame-casting is always fun, but you don't address my point which is that instead of bombing the localities concerned to smithereens, or selling out the population that didn't go along with the insurrectionists, the UK held fast and now the ringleaders are in government. Do you believe that many other countries would have dealt with it differently, especially after having lost over 1000 security forces dead?
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I'm sorry that you were barely able to comprehend my Gibberish. I've won awards for my Gibberish, spoken and written. And what about that that use of the word "oh"? Dead stylish.
teqniq
DisMembered
Are you going on tour? I love a bit of Gibberish.
I have to agree with belboid's analysis of your views on how the British government dealt with NI btw; indeed it was used as a proving ground for perfecting counter insurgency operations as defined by General Frank Kitson.
As to to the OP the Swiss would seem to have a pretty good model. Pity about the racism
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Remember, this was just about the "political setup" in the UK, not an excuse for people on the losing side to whine about history.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
But it isn't. I am arguing that it was wrong of the original poster to claim that it was obvious that the UK didn't have the best political set up, and people are basically saying Switzerland (apart from the racism) or Sweden (apart from the conformity).
Well, if the title were 'Which Country's corpocracy is best at inculcating the notion that they're something other than a bunch of power-crazed gimps nearing the end of the road to fascism?' I might be inclined to agree with you.
But as you perceptively point out, it isn't.
But as you perceptively point out, it isn't.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
style over substance, a perfect description of you and new labour! well done
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
actually, pointing out how the situation was caused is a quite important part of any discussion as to how and why a certain course of events occurred. not to mention that, as pointed out, their tactics in NI served them well, politically, militarily and economically. And it compares perfectly well with Spain. The only other european country with a similar 'problem'.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
You STILL haven't said whether you think other countries, faced with the challenge that the UK had to deal with, would have dealt with it better. But fair play for slagging me off, which is a kind of politics in some people's worlds.
edited to add - sorry, I missed the post where you did have a go at responding to that question.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
The difference is probably that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness lost their war and not only survived but are now in government, while ETA is still trying to blow up elected members and British tourists.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
The UK can make a strong claim to be a lead candiadates for one of the worst political set-ups in the rich, developed world.
Our 'democracy' is anarchronistic, disempowering and dysfunctional and as a result we have one of the lowest levels of democratic particapation. In addition The FPTP voting system allows a govenment to be elected to a position of significent executive power, with little in the way of constituional checks and balances - on as little as 40% of the turnout. The devastation visted upon this country by Thatcher was made possible by our voting system.
More recently the UK political set up allowed the government to take the country into an illegal war agasint the actively expressed wishes of the majority of the population. Even more damming was the fact that the government that did this could not be held to any form of account when
a. the war proved to be a total disaster
b. the reasons for going to war were shown to be a delibrate fabrication.
Also worth pointing out are the extreme levels of inequality and the extent of monopoly ownership of the media and the insidious growth of the surveilance state-all of which work against meaningful democracy.
As for N-Ireland - Jesus, the UK has very little to boast about their. The UK govs Hubris, callousness, pride and stupidity helped drag the modern troubles on for decades.
Our 'democracy' is anarchronistic, disempowering and dysfunctional and as a result we have one of the lowest levels of democratic particapation. In addition The FPTP voting system allows a govenment to be elected to a position of significent executive power, with little in the way of constituional checks and balances - on as little as 40% of the turnout. The devastation visted upon this country by Thatcher was made possible by our voting system.
More recently the UK political set up allowed the government to take the country into an illegal war agasint the actively expressed wishes of the majority of the population. Even more damming was the fact that the government that did this could not be held to any form of account when
a. the war proved to be a total disaster
b. the reasons for going to war were shown to be a delibrate fabrication.
Also worth pointing out are the extreme levels of inequality and the extent of monopoly ownership of the media and the insidious growth of the surveilance state-all of which work against meaningful democracy.
As for N-Ireland - Jesus, the UK has very little to boast about their. The UK govs Hubris, callousness, pride and stupidity helped drag the modern troubles on for decades.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Did they really? They might put it like 'we fought the british state to a standstill'.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
But they didn't. If the British state had really gone to town then selected parts of NI would be scorched holes in the ground and an awful lot more people over there would have had shorter and nastier lives than they went on to enjoy.
The British state endured 1000 deaths among the security forces to preserve a modicum of civilised life in NI, dealing death to only 550 terrorists. In the end, the leaders of the insurrectionists were genuinely at a loss as to who was and who was not an agent.
The terrorists didn't get what they wanted by means of murder, torture and extortion and are now reduced to electoral politics.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Good points, well made. I disagree with much of what you say but at least you're sticking to the point of the thread from the original post.
Fairly close to an oxymoron no?
It's a totally subjective question.
Those that benefit most from and are not disenfranchised by it are obviously going to sing it's praises.
Those that benefit most from and are not disenfranchised by it are obviously going to sing it's praises.
teqniq
DisMembered
I don't think that's entirely true. Like all politicians in the present mould, Adams et al were looking for the best possible deal they could get, in the meantime looking out for their own self interest. They were attempting to broker deals as early as the late 80's (via intermediaries) as the IRA was riddled with informants/double agents and deeply divided by then. For further reading on this I'd like to recomend 'A Secret History of the IRA' ISBN ISBN 0-393-32502-4
Still, I dunno whether this thread has been hijacked/derailed, considering NI I suppose it all depends on your perspective.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
is that 'probably' it? Not that the spanish government didnt bomb the hell out of the basque country, which according to you it should have? Nor the fact that sinn feins participation in government is woefully constrained and could be removed by a foreign power at any moment? I don't really think they support your argument very well at all.
[qute]I disagree with much of what you say but at least you're sticking to the point of the thread from the original post. [/quote]
ooh, get her, now she's the fucking arbiter of what's relevant to the thread. Always a good sign of when someones argument is getting ripped apart, they suddenly go 'stick to the point of the thread'.
And just to do that, another very very simple reason why the UK has very very obviously not get the best political set up - three of the four branches of government & law making are unelected. Anyone trying to defend that set up is a reactionary scumbag, pure and simple.
Similar threads
