The Political Thread

[Beaky Smoochies]

Sortition sounds noble and decent in theory, but is it actually doable in the real sense; legislation takes time and effort to go through in a thorough and comprehensive manner, so how long would each layperson in a House of Peers (or whatever it was renamed) serve for, would they have to give up their job temporarily to do so, what burdens would that put on their employers in replacing them, how long would they have in advance to secure lodgings in the capital before their term begins, do they have the knowledge and expertise to handle complex and often legally/constitutionally labyrinthine legislation, etc, etc... you see my point?

Whilst the current House of Lords is certainly a flawed and imperfect institution in it's (limited) constitutional duties, I would rather they just 'tidy up' the chamber rather than go for some Lib Dem-spearheaded folly of a reform bill that's going to make matters worse.  A lot worse.  If they cap the numbers of the House to about 450 (as planned), bring in non-renewable term limits for all new appointed Peers (12 years), ensure that political parties are represented in the Lords proportional to their overall percentage of the vote at the last general election, clear the decks of all current Peers who haven't shown up for more than a determined number of days over the last parliamentary term (and continue to do so at the end of each five-year parliamentary term), raise the maximum time the Lords can delay a bill from one year to three years, and leave everything else as is, that I would have no problem with; the Commons retains supremacy, the Lords remains a purely revising chamber (but with added teeth and less fat), and the knowledge and experience of serving Peers is retained, not perfect but infinitely better than the current constitutional wrecking ball planned by Cleggers and co...

[Frank]

Sortition sounds noble and decent in theory, but is it actually doable in the real sense; legislation takes time and effort to go through in a thorough and comprehensive manner, so how long would each layperson in a House of Peers (or whatever it was renamed) serve for, would they have to give up their job temporarily to do so, what burdens would that put on their employers in replacing them, how long would they have in advance to secure lodgings in the capital before their term begins, do they have the knowledge and expertise to handle complex and often legally/constitutionally labyrinthine legislation, etc, etc... you see my point

Beaky; every single objection you raise has already been dealt with in the previous posts. Whatever doubts you have concerning the practicality of the solutions proposed, they can't be any more expensive or cumbersome than the existing system of expenses and second home allowances that have brought our current legislators into disrepute. I was presenting sortition as a model for replacing both chambers of Parliament, rather than as a sop to an ideological desire to dismantle The Lords.

The greatest advantage I can see of Sortition, is that it does away with the influence of party political loyalty and vested interest in the decision making process. Because they're not career politicians, the ordinary punters alotted to serve a fixed term at Westminster wouldn't let their own career prospects influence the decisions they made; and they wouldn't suffer from our current legislators' paralysing fear of being shown to get decisions wrong, or of being shown to have changed their minds on an important issue.

That Chloe Smith beasting I linked to only happened because the poor wee cow was doing her utmost to avoid admitting that her boss (Gideon Osbourne, strangely not available for interview) had got it wrong and changed his mind. What kind of political and media culture have we created when the folk we elect to make important decisions on our behalf are forced to persevere with ill-conceived or no longer appropriate policies because they live in terror of the political fallout from admitting they fucked up? Most people would agree with the decision to suspend the increased tax on fuel.

Sortition would force us all to grow up and stop looking for Churchillian or presidential leaders who know better than us and have some kind of spurious vision for where we're all headed. When we're all effectively, collectively responsible for taking the decisions that affect our daily lives, we won't have the lazy, cynical fall back position of blaming them for everything that goes wrong- or the cruel pleasure of watching Paxman demolish party apparatchiks for sport.

[judgefloyd]

So where you going to explain exactly what makes Jimmy Carter a vicious anti-semite (or even a cuddly one) or are you just going to let questionable quotations from Martin Luther King do the job for you?  I'm genuinely curious about this.

[JOE SOAP]

The fact that sortition was the least corruptable of democratic systems and functioned quite well in ancient Athens* is probably one of the reasons why it never caught on. It's such a dispassionate egalitarian system that it tends not to stoke ideological fires amongst progressives, zealots, radicals and other shitehawk-led and fire-branded movements who feed off the mythical, empty and impossible promise of an always 'better' future, instead of just getting the job done.


Being of an anarcho bent anyway and influenced by P.K. Dick's Solar Lottery, there's a modern sortition group I've been following these past years called the Kleroterians:


Equality-by-lot is the blog of the Kleroterians. The Kleroterians are an informal group interested in the deliberate use of randomness (lottery) in human affairs. There are two main areas of interest: Its use in Governance (sortition) and Distribution. The aim of this blog is to provide a discussion and information forum for ourselves, but also a 'shop-window' for our ideas.



https://equalitybylot.wordpress.com/


*Although it was restricted to males who'd done military service.

[GordonR]

So where you going to explain exactly what makes Jimmy Carter a vicious anti-semite (or even a cuddly one) or are you just going to let questionable quotations from Martin Luther King do the job for you?  I'm genuinely curious about this.

I was wondering that too, especially since he's tried trolling with this apparent nonsense elsewhere on the board. Some chapter and verse evidence on the theme of Jimmy Carter: Well-Known Anti-Semite would be useful here.

[mygrimmbrother]

Jimmy Carter: Well-Known Anti-Semite.

I read that - wasn't as good as Pride & Prejudice & Zombies though.

[Beaky Smoochies]

Okie-dokie then, by popular demand and constant baiting by some here (looking at YOU Rich), I'll respond to what I said about Carter;

I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda, so I'll give you a link to a newspaper that's far from being a right-wing/conservative site, and let that speak for itself, but before I do, that quote from Martin Luther King is not a "dubious" quote, no-one has ever disputed the fact that MLK wrote it in his own hand, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears, but you can't, now then, that link-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011901541.html

- no doubt some here will dispute the article, but let it not be said here (looking at YOU again Rich) that I have not responded in kind, argument given, job done, subject over (for me anyway), unless you fancy going another round...

[M.I.K.]

If I'm understanding the author of that opinion piece correctly, she seems to be saying that Jimmy Carter's criticism of the media is in danger of being anti-semitic, because of the implication that the media is under Jewish control.

Not as convincing an argument as it could be, to be honest. Need better evidence.

I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail,

I could probably link to a few explaining some Jewish folk's intense dislike of the Jewish state in specific detail. Does that make them anti-semitic?

[Beaky Smoochies]

If I'm understanding the author of that opinion piece correctly, she seems to be saying that Jimmy Carter's criticism of the media is in danger of being anti-semitic, because of the implication that the media is under Jewish control.  Not as convincing an argument as it could be, to be honest. Need better evidence.

That's not how I read it, I think you're reading into it what you want to read (with all due respect), and what "better evidence" would you like, Carter's Hamas membership card?  I find it amusing that some many here, and in the world at large, have a pretty glaring double-standard when it comes to Israel, the very worst slanders, smear, and blood libels are levelled at the Jewish state ad nauseum, they are accused of the worst things by some highly dubious people (Galloway, Carter, Fink, Pilcher, to name a few usual anti-semitic suspects), and is believed by many at face value, but call out the slander and smear merchants for what they are, and systematically debunk their vile propaganda, you get a backlash like on this thread, sad, people, sad...

[Beaky Smoochies]

My last word on this subject - and thread, it seems to bring out the worst in people here - is MLK's words on this subject; read it, consider it, think about it, and look in the mirror if you dare, I'm done here, 'nuff said. -

http://www.internationalwallofprayer.org/A-022-Martin-Luther-King-Zionism.html

[Roger Godpleton]

Where do you stand on Fruit Pastilles?

[Eric Plumrose]

Beaky, being as you are an unapologetically right-wing Christian evangelical Zionist social and economic conservative with libertarian leanings, you've got a vested interest in the restoration of Israel, yes?

[IAMTHESYSTEM]

Wasn't there a series of 'Crusader States' built by Western power's in the Holy land that all lasted about 80 years or so? All failed or were overrun by Saladin I think.

Perhaps that's the fate that awaits Israel. The country will last a century or so but eventually external and internal pressures mean collapse and a retreat to Europe or America for the survivors. Also with American power slowly failing Israel's neighbours and historical rivals will inevitably gain a social and Military momentum that will properly prove unstoppable.

The Muslim Brotherhood recently voted into power in Egypt could be the shape of things to come.

[JOE SOAP]

My last word on this subject - and thread, it seems to bring out the worst in people here - is MLK's words on this subject; read it, consider it, think about it, and look in the mirror if you dare, I'm done here, 'nuff said. -

It's that type of pontification that gets people nowhere.

but call out the slander and smear merchants for what they are, and systematically debunk their vile propaganda, you get a backlash like on this thread, sad, people, sad...

Despite how any side sells it, Israel is not beyond reproach, and I feel sorry for anyone who has their land taken from them, even Palestinians.

[The Legendary Shark]

Capitalism, Communism, Zionism, Nazism, Marxism, Catholicism, Federalism - they're all the same animal. The Greater Spotted Ism is a curious beast with a flair for camouflage and a seductive song. All Isms require resources to survive and jostle for position as Alpha Ism and they do this by appealing to the baser fears and desires of human nature; presenting problems and then providing solutions and rewards. Isms need followers to survive and zealots for the jostling. And as these majestic Isms lock horns in the eternal struggle for supremacy, countless Ordinary People are swept along and trampled underfoot.

Our ancestors tamed wolves and wildcats and oxen and horses. Maybe it's time we did our bit for human evolution and tamed the Isms.