User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Ban Parties?

  1. #1
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default Ban Parties?

    Would democracy be improved if politicians were required to stand alone and not in parties?
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?
    Likes Cygnus liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,776

    Default

    I was hoping suggestion of when a globally hated member got banned we had a party.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so
    Likes Hard, chickpea, Bush Did 9/11, Bknight liked this post

  3. #3
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,039

    Default

    Hmm.. I was thinking that it might, but some dictatorships and absolute monarchies states ban political parties altogether (I suppose because it allows for the possible of a challenge to the leader, even if it's only a single party. Such things have happened in single-party states). This seems to suggest to me that political parties have an important role to play, as ridiculous as the partisan shitshow can sometimes be.

    Do partisan divisions reflect real ideological splits, or are they just created by parties as a way of maintaining power. This article suggests that they represent actual ideological splits, even if compromise between both sides of an issue is theoretically possible. It seems plausible enough. I'd like to check out the whole book someday, provided I can overcome my laziness.

    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  4. #4

    Default

    I doubt it.

    Its not the party machinery that's to blame for most of what I would say is problematic in politics.

  5. #5
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander
    Would democracy be improved if politicians were required to stand alone and not in parties?
    That would require too much work of the average low-information voter. As I see it, democracy is only as good as the quality of the electorate. Sure, banning parties and party affiliation would help if it encouraged voters to do more work in educating themselves on the issues, but that's not a realistic expectation.

    The quality of the national media is also vital; if they're in the tank for one candidate and that candidate sucks, the nation is screwed. It's very, very difficult to defeat a candidate (even a coke snorting, incompetent fool) with most of the national media behind him.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,628

    Default

    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    That would require too much work of the average low-information voter. As I see it, democracy is only as good as the quality of the electorate. Sure, banning parties and party affiliation would help if it encouraged voters to do more work in educating themselves on the issues, but that's not a realistic expectation.

    The quality of the national media is also vital; if they're in the tank for one candidate and that candidate sucks, the nation is screwed. It's very, very difficult to defeat a candidate (even a coke snorting, incompetent fool) with most of the national media behind him.
    Regulate ballots and political advertisement more tightly. Educate people on the inner workings of politics before allowing them to vote.


    I mean, it's already a Republic and not a true Democracy, so might as well do a Republic effectively.

  7. #7
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    9,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    That would require too much work of the average low-information voter. As I see it, democracy is only as good as the quality of the electorate. Sure, banning parties and party affiliation would help if it encouraged voters to do more work in educating themselves on the issues, but that's not a realistic expectation.
    I agree. Sounds great but it won't work.
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.
    Likes Tellenbach, Bknight liked this post

  8. #8
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    In my experience there are many who don't do any research. They become entrenched in habit from their parents and continue to vote the same way because that's the way they vote. Perhaps by forcing these people to actually look at the candidates you might get a more reflective representation in government and less of this 'them vs us' set of politics.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?
    Likes Cygnus liked this post

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    That would require too much work of the average low-information voter. As I see it, democracy is only as good as the quality of the electorate. Sure, banning parties and party affiliation would help if it encouraged voters to do more work in educating themselves on the issues, but that's not a realistic expectation.

    The quality of the national media is also vital; if they're in the tank for one candidate and that candidate sucks, the nation is screwed. It's very, very difficult to defeat a candidate (even a coke snorting, incompetent fool) with most of the national media behind him.
    I do believe a democracy is dependent upon the quality of the electorate, premised upon self-government as it is, however, representation and elective democracy, like the life of anyone in any workplace, is a model in which decisive self-government is deliberately very limited.

    I dont see when that has been the tradition for so long that it would be overcome by so singular and simple a change as suspending or abolishing the existence of political parties. I dont see why it would lead to individuals being more informed, interested or engaged, in a word more responsible.

    I dont believe its the media either, perhaps in countries like the UK were the press is very partisan and the main organ for manufacturing conscent among the governed still but in the US it has been superseded by political advertising for which the parties and their corporate sponsors pay top bill.

    Whether the democracy is characterised by individual candidates or political parties while a situation persists in which money talks the loudest then the government can be and frequently is bought.

    I would suggest that addressing the gross concentrations of wealth and the centres of power that creates is a prerequisite to any real democracy but there's no way that can result from a situation in which any reform of monopoly capitalism is construed as "socialism" or some other prejorative label which gives rise to emoting and hatred rather than critical thinking.

    If the plutocratic concentrations of wealth are natural and unavoidable, either the result of spontaneous order, the best of all possible worlds or alternatively simply the least worst world on balance considering all alternatives, then there really isnt anything to be done about it.

  10. #10
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    9,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    In my experience there are many who don't do any research. They become entrenched in habit from their parents and continue to vote the same way because that's the way they vote. Perhaps by forcing these people to actually look at the candidates you might get a more reflective representation in government and less of this 'them vs us' set of politics.
    This is why I hate straight party voting. It makes it too easy. I would back a test you had to take before you could vote too.
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.
    Likes Cygnus, Xander liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. Political Party?
    By wyrdsister in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 08:09 PM
  3. Parties
    By substitute in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-13-2007, 11:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO