Aussie Election called for Oct 9th

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-05 11:12pm

Id destroy you for your insolence....but Australian Idols on

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-09-05 11:24pm

Perhaps it could be the first true belevolent dictatorship though... after all, just as long as they leave us alone, the only people who are going to cause a fuss are the 5% of uni students who have nothing better to do and who actually care.

I mean, would you really care whether you lived in a democracy or not, as long as everything was ok?

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-05 11:29pm

Hm. good point. Yes Id prefer to live that way, so long as it was a true benevolent dictatorship (a la Augustus or something).

If everything was running great, sure Id be happy with that. If the rule of law is upheld, welfare runs well and fairly, utilities maintained and education for all holds true, sure.

But in our current state, it isnt, and none of them are taking responsibility for their failures. I thought that was the point of government, with great power comes great responsibility. Seems they dropped the ball on the last part.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-09-05 11:40pm

pellaeons_scion wrote:I thought that was the point of government, with great power comes great responsibility. Seems they dropped the ball on the last part.

No, that's the point of dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, where ONE man or party has the power and thus, the responsibility is directly proportional to that one man or party (holding them to account is another matter, of course...

). Democratic government operates under the assumption that division of power, checks and balances, separation of powers etc aids accountability and stability, because one man or party shouldn't hold that much power. Unfortunately this creates a lot of conflict internally, and long-term planning becomes harder to do. Accountability still remains, but due to the separation of powers the blame gets thrown around a lot.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-09-06 12:08am

Well, by fixing a problem, you admit it was there in the first place, and voters might notice the problem more than the fact that you're trying to fix it ... you know I just realised what one of the stupidest things about it all is.

If a poitician stays firm in the face of opposition from the general population then he's howled down for not abiding by the wishes of the people.

If a politician changes his stance on an issue in the face of opposition from the general population then he's howled down for "backflipping".

It seems quite absurd.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-06 12:59am

Bit of a no win situation really for a politician isnt it Lusankya..note to self, never become a politician.

As for what you were saying about checks and balances Stofsk, it seems that our system pays a cursory amount of attention to it, but in the end nothing really happens, or it gets swept under the carpet anyway. Plus with our seperation of powers a lot of matters get tied up in red-tape and shuffled from department to department until it finally fades away.

I guess that would be the downside of even a benevolent dictator, if they go 'bad' theres no real legal recourse..except perhaps coups, revolutions and other bloody matters.

Id say that the amount of accountability in this current system is very low, as has been demonstrated in various discoveries of rorts and abuses of priveldge. (ill have to do some looking to dig some up, but mal colstons rubbish springs to mind, also the funneling of funds to a private project by the former minister of health(name forgotten), Peter Reith and his massive phonebills by his son etc) Not a lot happens to those in power when they do those things. If your ordinary citizen commited those acts, you would more than likely be penalised and punished for it.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-09-06 02:12am

Does it seem odd to anyone else that in a thread about the election we're discussing the possibility of becoming a dictatorship?

BTW. I love the sig, pellaeon... it's so true.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-06 02:18am

*bows* I thought it was appropriate after a heated alcohol fueled debate with friends about any kind of activism in australia

As for the discussion of the dictatorship, well, might as well be really. Things like sending troops to Iraq without a referendum spring to mind. Major decisions that affect us all are pursued without a single thought about how their consituents think. They make law, and policy and dont give a damn about what really is 'best'. Its a democracy in that they 'allow' us to speak our grievances but thats about all.

Latham/Howard...the difference? Not a great deal I think. even if Latham wins, his tough guy stance will be reduced to the sycophantism that howard displayed...it just might not be so obvious.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-09-06 02:35am

I dunno. I don't think they need a referendum to go to war... Just imagine Indonesia invading and the government going, "Wait! We can't commit our troops just yet! We need a referendum first!"

And I think that John Howard is honestly doing what he thinks is best. I don't really want to comment on whether he's right or not because I really don't know and it's really too messy a discussion for me to feel like getting involved in just yet.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-06 02:38am

in the case of an imminent invasion or attack sure they could act in that fashion.

But, as you said, its too messy a topic, particularly as youve only just newly returned. Welcome back anyway

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2004-09-06 04:04am

Stofsk wrote:
Archaic` wrote:Let's see then...the only other high profile liberals would be Abbot, Ruddock and Vaile, right? What've their screw-ups been? Do any of them even have enough ambition to try for the leadership?
Just quickly - because I gotta go to a lecture - Tony Abbot is a moron fundie, Phillip Ruddock resembles Palpatine, and I have no clue who Vaile is.

Mark Vaile, Minister for Trade.

pellaeons_scion wrote:I think the other factor of this all is, is who really understands our political system here. Was anyone specifically taught it at school? From what Ive found the general consensus reveals that much of the population is blissfully unaware of how the process works, and from that ignorance comes a lack of real drive to be interested in the process.

Compulsory unit of SOSE back in year 8, and had another compulsory unit of it as part of my university studies last year.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-09-06 04:33am

Archaic` wrote:
Stofsk wrote:Just quickly - because I gotta go to a lecture - Tony Abbot is a moron fundie, Phillip Ruddock resembles Palpatine, and I have no clue who Vaile is.
Mark Vaile, Minister for Trade.

He wouldn't be the same Minister for Trade that negotiated the 'Free Trade' Agreement with the US which basically boils down to the US having virtually unlimitated access to our markets and we have to wait like 8 - 10 years to have tarriff free trade to theirs would it?

Colour me unimpressed.

But the list of Liberals I down right despise beats the list of Labour ministers I think are drunk wife beating yobos, so I'm voting Labour.

Think about it; we had one minister who gave his son his phone card so that he could call home (at our expense). We have Amanda Vanstone (enough said). Downer - who's main attribute as Foreign Minister is to piss off other Foreign Ministers and be under the mistaken impression that North Korea is going to listen to Australia. We have the 'children overboard' and 'WMD' spin doctors ... no way, no fucking way am I voting Liberal.

And Costello! Smugness doesn't have a better avatar than him (well maybe Cheney).

*shakes head*

pellaeons_scion wrote:I think the other factor of this all is, is who really understands our political system here. Was anyone specifically taught it at school? From what Ive found the general consensus reveals that much of the population is blissfully unaware of how the process works, and from that ignorance comes a lack of real drive to be interested in the process.
Compulsory unit of SOSE back in year 8, and had another compulsory unit of it as part of my university studies last year.

Shit, I'm hard pressed to remember which federal seat I'm located in (it's Holt, but fucked if I know who the minister is, I usually find out a few days before election).

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-09-06 04:48am

Lusankya wrote:All I know is I'm putting the Greens way down the bottom... I like living in a country with an economy to speak of.

No way! Where have you been? Fall down a black hole or something?

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2004-09-06 06:25am

...I can't help but notice that for the most part, we're debating liberal/labour based on their personalities and not their policies. Okay, fair enough, there's not much difference whatsoever in their policies thesedays, but surely there must be something to set them apart?

Post by **weemadando** » 2004-09-07 01:19am

Anyone else hear the quote from MediaWatch last night, from whoever that red-headed labor wench is: "If the majority of the Australian people choose to return a liberal government then I think that democracy is dead in this country."

[sarcasm]Yet another reason to vote labor[/sarcasm]

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-09-07 01:30am

Just read the transcript on the site. Some people should never have learned speech..

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2004-09-07 04:03am

We're screwed either way; between illegal gay marriages and the 'free for the US' trade agreement, Australia no longer has anything to be proud of. Not that the nation should have rested on its 'we got slaughtered by the thousand in camel-land' laurels anyway

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2004-09-07 06:39am

Lusankya wrote:I dunno. I don't think they need a referendum to go to war... Just imagine Indonesia invading and the government going, "Wait! We can't commit our troops just yet! We need a referendum first!"

In Australia the PM and his cabinet have the power to declair war/start military action somewhere when ever they want. The Parliament isnt even formally in the loop, despit the fact that a PM can have it debated.

Stark wrote:We're screwed either way; between illegal gay marriages and the 'free for the US' trade agreement, Australia no longer has anything to be proud of.

The bit about illegal gay marriages isnt actually a change(All they are doing is closing loopholes), but the 'free for the US' trade agreement is very one sided in who will benifit.