To think that democracy isn't necessarily the best form of government?

[Thebestwaytoscareatory]

For example, I'm interested in politics and governance and have spent time learning about the topic, yet my vote counts exactly as much as someone who thinks all brown people are rapists or that all women are nothing more than broodmares.

This doesn't sit right with me. Surely we should acknowledge that some opinions are not as valid as others and take steps to ensure that the lowest common denominator isn't represented equally at elections?

That’s right OP. Let’s decide whose vote should count. Surely women’s votes don’t, because they can be hysteric. Definitely not gay people, they don’t have morals. And not people of other religions- they are all terrorists. Brown people don’t really know much about what is best for our culture (and and are probably terrorists). And poor people should know their place in life. Autistic people and their ilk really shouldn’t vote of course, and neither should physically disabled people. Non-religious people are the same category as other religions.
Really, only rich, white, religious, educated men should vote, they know best!

@SerendipityJane FPTP does represent the people who voted for that candidate. That can even be over 50%.Obviously not always. As I said, my views have never been represented. Won’t ever be I suspect.

You cannot get away from weighing up the difficulties with FPTP against coalition difficulties when MPs cannot work together. Could you ever have imagined Corbyn’s Labour working with the Cons? Are we ok with the prospect of this turmoil?

The idea of someone thinking they can remove votes from other people is more concerning to me than a person with a couple of GCSE getting a vote

There are people - who walk among us - that believe if you earn more money you should have more votes.

All of this discussion needs to bear in mind that that actual turnout for any UK election rarely exceeds 70% and vert often is less than 30%.

Do you know something ?

If something works, I give not a flying fuck what colour carton it came in. I'd happily have a fully funded and working NHS under a Tory flag as a Labour flag.

The problem is I am up against people who would much rather have a shit service under their flag, than a better under someone elses.

Very few voters are truly ideologues. Whilst I cannot put into words how much I despise the Tories, it's not a Netflix and Chill for the Labour party. Who can be equally ghastly and no doubt will need removing after so many years in power corrupt them as much as they have corrupted the Tories.

I haven’t heard the money one but for claims of education I’d say it’s a failure of education to believe you can strip votes from people due to a perceived superiority

They used to do that. That's why womens couldn't vote...

They thought they were right. The example you've given is obviously right but there would be many cases that would be opinion, and might lead to serious social regression.

Hmmm

The expertise issue is nonsense. We don't ask people to vote on details of economic policy usually. It's why Brexit should never have been put to a referendum.
Elections are about what policies are important to people.. why should a group of well off professionals decide the cost of living crisis is not a priority to tackle? Or that there is no need for better laws to protect tenants?
We desperately need democracy. But we also need a decent political class who are not corrupt. The political class is the real issue.

Very few voters are truly ideologues. Whilst I cannot put into words how much I despise the Tories, it's not a Netflix and Chill for the Labour Party.

SerendipityJane so who do you want?

I’m surprised someone who is on the left is proposing it. It’s such a terrible idea

So nurses, plumbers, artists, social workers etc no say..

What a crazy aim. At least 86% say yabu

I'll know it when I see it.

Probably one of the most interesting MN threads for a while.

My two cents worth: government is not governance.

Democracy is probably the least worst of all the systems that have been tried.

I'm not wedded to the notion of FPTP, and actually I think broad centrist coalitions are preferable, because slower to legislate and more open to reaching consensus.

The existence of a focused political class is a problem. Eton or shop steward to researcher and on to MP is too narrow a route to political power.

I approve of a bicameral legislature, such as a Senate or HoL, but I don't think anyone joining or appointed to it should sit for longer than one 10 year term.

But is the reason they can't work together FPTP? Other counties manage it. We managed it during the war. We should have has a coalition working towards a decent Brexit deal ( although I agree it was too complex an issue to put to the electorate) and we should have had a government of national unity to deal with COVID but instead we had what we had because we had a buffoon in charge surrounded by ideologues on both sides.. Corbyn wouldn't have worked with the Tories and didn't, to everybody's detriment during the referendum campaign because he is a 6th form ideologue. We need a better calibre of politicians than this.

I actually think shop steward to MP is less of a problem than Eton to MP. The traditional right wing route was Eton, lawyer, to MP. I think all MPs should have worked in other jobs before becoming MPs.

On the point that government and governance mean different responsibilities, my opinion is that the Civil Service is well-intentioned but currently inadequate. Too few scientists, definitely non numerate enough and this is hard to fix: there's a UK job going to oversee and regulate AI being advertised at about £80k per annum, whereas in Silicon Valley the head of policy making for Google AI would command 10x that salary.... so which side of the fence does a person choose? The power to rule or the salary?

We should have has a coalition working towards a decent Brexit deal

The presupposes Brexit was meant to work. Which it wasn't.

I doubt this discussion would have the same character had Brexit not happened. It's the poster child for a total and utter failure of government at every possible turn.

@EffortlessDesmond I am personally ok with a coalition but you would find the general voting public doesn’t like delays. We are also used to adversarial politics and it’s getting worse.

We do have a poor method of selecting MPs. Too few are involved. Etonian’s are a minority though!

I noticed “sortition” was mentioned earlier. As this is a random selection of representatives , heaven help us frankly. What do we do if 50% are not up to the job? We need a better selection process for MPs but random isn’t it.

i meant to add: we like the policies we’ve voted for. Not ones of other parties. Coalitions are a hard sell.

@EffortlessDesmond there used to be a culture in the civil service and to an extent all public services of public service. People regularly took jobs for way less money than they could get elsewhere. That culture has been deliberately eroded.
In return those staff got a fairly secure job and a good pension. That too has been eroded.
The idea people only take jobs for the salary is manifestly untrue after a certain level of salary.

surely the whole thing about democracy is that everyone gets a say and the majority gets their choice. So although the racist or misogynist may have the same weight of vote, as long as they are in the minority their choice will not win.
With your system how would it be decided who is worthy of a vote and who is not? At the moment those serving prison sentences cannot vote after being tried and found guilty of a crime which is enough for me.

Democracy is awful. It gives votes to the stupid, the ignorant, the bigoted, the uneducated, the criminal and the mentally ill. The UK’s particular flavour of democracy, featuring a ridiculous first past the post electoral system, an unelected House of Lords and an unelected, unaccountable head of state, is particularly bad.

The question is what would be better? Of course we could sack the monarchy and abolish the HOL & bring in proportional representation, but how could we decide on what to replace those things with. Referendums? Well, the last one was a disaster for the country as the aforementioned stupid, ignorant etc decided to leave the EU.
And if we decide that the stupid, ignorant etc shouldn’t vote, who decides where to draw the line? So, democracy is indeed awful. But, if not democracy, then what? And who decides?

IIRC for all but a couple of years it wasn't a case of men or women, rather you had to own property in order to vote. I'm feel bad for the men who couldn't vote but were still shipped off to fight in wars.

The idea of limiting voting to those who have bought or earned a tangible stake (such as through owning land or military service etc.) isn't a bad one.

The idea of limiting voting to those who have bought or earned a tangible stake (such as through owning land or military service etc.) isn't a bad one.

I agree that "bad" isn't the word I would use.

Incidentally, can anyone here put a value on a vote ? (a serious question that some may already suspect has a thrust ...)

Intelligent people can be arseholes too...not mutually exclusive.

Giving everyone the right to vote kind of smooths out the extremes at each end of the spectrum.

My opinion is that we generally want the government we get... on average... otherwise we'd rise up against them and depose them... wouldn't we? They do only govern us because we let them, because they represent we-the-people in parliament.

Even though it's never explained to us in any meaningful way (and there is an argument that things you learn yourself have a greater authenticity than things you are taught) there is the notion of a social contract to life in any society.

We give up rights and powers (cf. a current thread about the breakdown of law and order) to the state in the vague understanding that in return we receive a better deal.

However this compact does need to be honoured to some degree or you will get heads on spikes.

And having paid "a fucktonne" of tax these past 40 plus years, I'm not impressed that the state now needs to ask for even more.