Forming a political party...

[-df-]

Hi all,

I've decided I'm going to stop bitching and moaning about what the government does and actually try and do something about it.

I've got an idea that I think will work, but let me run it by you to see if others see things my way.

How my vote would work if I was elected.

There will be a website (100% safe) where any person who is eligible to vote can log on and make a vote about any upcoming law being put forward. From the information collected I'd then match that vote (e.g. if 60% of people didn't want the "anti-smacking" bill passed, I'd then vote against it, and vise-vesa). There would be some finer details to it then just this, but I'm sure this would give you the idea of what I'm talking about.

Now I'm not someone that likes politics, in fact I hate them, but I'm also tired of sitting around bitching about things when I'm not even willing to make a difference.

I'm still at the very start of the planning stage (not even sure yet when the cut off dates are etc) so I still have to work out if it’s feasible or not for me to do.

So...thoughts would be great.

[Hitcher]

A *Talkback Radio* political party where the uninformed and xenophobic can make sweeping decisions based on issues du jour?

A New Zealand where:

- There are no Asian immigrants or immigrants from countries whose residents are not white, rich and English speaking
- Foreign investment is prohibited
- Tourism is banned
- People can only buy goods and services manufactured in New Zealand
- All businesses are closed at weekends and on public holidays
- Corporal punishment is reintroduced to schools
- A death penalty is imposed for certain crimes
- All sport is broadcast free-to-air
- Etc

We live in a democracy. That means that people have to accept a majority view, even though it may not align with their own values or opinions. Get over it.

[-df-]

We live in a democracy. That means that people have to accept a majority view, even though it may not align with their own values or opinions.

you are 100% right there, perhaps if you re-read what I wrote, you would understand that is exactly what I'm trying to do.

So are you saying the majority of people wanted the Electoral Finance Bill to pass? No, but it still passed anyway.

[Bikernereid]

Not from NZ but as someone who worked in EU politics and was elected at local level in the UK I commend what you are doing. I would support anyone who has the balls to stop bithcing and stand up for what they believe in. If only more people did it!!

I really like idea of voting for Bills as dictated by on-line voting so that electorate is directing your voting decisions!! The only concern I would have it how do you monitor whether one person is voting online more than once. I would be worried about the within the electorate having more say than other members of the public. Do you think the "anti-smacking" bill would have come about if your idea had have been implemeted at the time.

One question I do have is what would you do if you fundamentally disagreed with a particular piece of legislation and the online voting was supporting that legisaltion do you believe that you could go against what you believe to meet the dictates of the elusive electorate?

What ever you do I think you deserve all the support you can get for having the courage of your convictions and for sticking you head above the parapet. God if there were more people like you in the world we might actuallt get some decent legislation out there. Sorry I am still in shock regarding the "anti-smacking" Bill. Thanks God we rejected it in the UK. I before anyone misinterprets this I do not CONDONE beating children at all but I do not favour a nanny state that dictates how people bring up thier own children.


Hi all,

I've decided I'm going to stop bitching and moaning about what the government does and actually try and do something about it.

I've got an idea that I think will work, but let me run it by you to see if others see things my way.

How my vote would work if I was elected.

There will be a website (100% safe) where any person who is eligible to vote can log on and make a vote about any upcoming law being put forward. From the information collected I'd then match that vote (e.g. if 60% of people didn't want the "anti-smacking" bill passed, I'd then vote against it, and vise-vesa). There would be some finer details to it then just this, but I'm sure this would give you the idea of what I'm talking about.

Now I'm not someone that likes politics, in fact I hate them, but I'm also tired of sitting around bitching about things when I'm not even willing to make a difference.

I'm still at the very start of the planning stage (not even sure yet when the cut off dates are etc) so I still have to work out if it’s feasible or not for me to do.

So...thoughts would be great.

[-df-]

Not from NZ but as someone who worked in EU politics and was elected at local level in the UK I commend what you are doing. I would support anyone who has the balls to stop bithcing and stand up for what they believe in. If only more people did it!!

I really like idea of voting for Bills as dictated by on-line voting so that electorate is directing your voting decisions!! The only concern I would have it how do you monitor whether one person is voting online more than once. I would be worried about the within the electorate having more say than other members of the public. Do you think the "anti-smacking" bill would have come about if your idea had have been implemeted at the time.

One question I do have is what would you do if you fundamentally disagreed with a particular piece of legislation and the online voting was supporting that legisaltion do you believe that you could go against what you believe to meet the dictates of the elusive electorate?

What ever you do I think you deserve all the support you can get for having the courage of your convictions and for sticking you head above the parapet. God if there were more people like you in the world we might actuallt get some decent legislation out there. Sorry I am still in shock regarding the "anti-smacking" Bill. Thanks God we rejected it in the UK. I before anyone misinterprets this I do not CONDONE beating children at all but I do not favour a nanny state that dictates how people bring up thier own children.

Thanks for the encouragement, it really does means a lot to me.

To answer your questions:

safety for the vote - This would be an easy one to address. Every person has a unique identifier that they would use to identify themselves (already in use, look at your "confirm your details" form that comes out for elections). This would mean only 1 vote per voter. This still needs work I admit, but don't see this as being a major problem

personal views - This is an easy answer for me, as going against a promise (promise to the people that I will do the vote as I stated) would be far harder for me to go against then my own feelings. You would probably have to know me to understand this...all I can say is for me it’s an easy choice. I would be there to serve the people as they wanted, not how I want which is the problem I see with the current system.

[MSTRS]

One question I do have is what would you do if you fundamentally disagreed with a particular piece of legislation and the online voting was supporting that legisaltion do you believe that you could go against what you believe to meet the dictates of the elusive electorate?


Question not necessary. An electorate MP represents the people of that electorate. Only list MP's have the 'freedom' to represent themselves.
Problem is, MP's can get the idea that it is all about them, if left in the seat a while.

[Number One]

I really like idea of voting for Bills as dictated by on-line voting so that electorate is directing your voting decisions!! The only concern I would have it how do you monitor whether one person is voting online more than once.

That'd be my issue with it too. Not secure enough too easy to mess with, not a guaranteed accurate reflection of the punters.

EDIT:Sorry I too slow - see now that you addressed this..

[ManDownUnder]

There will be a website (100% safe)

ok... there's issue number one.

Seriously though... if you want to do it, don't take no or abuse for an answer. I personally see problems ahead for what you want to do, the biggest one being an honest person walking into Parliament.

Politics is a HUGE game and walking in expecting to change things is like a well intentioned 15 year old trying to sue a lawyer. There's a snowballs chance in hell...

[Swoop]

Think of the savings for the country.

LESS MP's required. Get rid of 90% of the morons AND their parasites (who remain in parliament "advising and guiding" new MP's...).

No waste of money at election time. Ballot booths', organisers, printing costs, etc.

Monthly or possibly weekly referendums. Binding referendums perhaps?:rolleyes:

Chance of it happening? 0.
Can you see the labourite sect and the weird-beird greenies having any part of it being set up?

[davereid]

You have been brainwashed into thinking that democracy is a good thing.

The concept of "majority rules" is pushed on us by a system that relies on its inherent corruption to maintain power.

We all know that gang rape is wrong. The gang is in the majority, and has voted itself the right to use force to exploit the assets of a minority.

Its actually EXACTLY the same as un-constrained democracy.

Governments know that they can exploit the minority as well, and thus retain the status-quo.

Whats the answer ?

CONSTRAINED Democracy.
Thats where the government is elected by the people. But, even when it's elected it can't use force except for the priciple of self defence.
(And laws are just the descriptions of the force to be used, under given circumstances.)


So..
It CAN use force (laws) to stop murder, theft and so on.
It CAN use laws to stop you endangering other road users by riding like an idiot.

But it CAN'T use laws to make you pay into kiwisaver.
It can't use force to make you pay for it's electioneering costs.
It can't pass laws that make you do anything unless you actions threaten or endanger others.

So.. until it is properly constrained, please, don't force democracy on me. I get raped enough by government as it is.

[Bikernereid]

You sound like one of the very few politicians I have any respect for Mr Tony Benn. I do not agree with his politics at all but he is a man of true conviction and principles and has never fudged them to be popular or to gain political stature or positions. He inspired me to study politics!

If you can look yourself in the mirror and like what you see then that is a bloody good start as far as I am concerned and you sould like you are going into this for the right reasons so you go for it!!


Thanks for the encouragement, it really does means a lot to me.

To answer your questions:

safety for the vote - This would be an easy one to address. Every person has a unique identifier that they would use to identify themselves (already in use, look at your "confirm your details" form that comes out for elections). This would mean only 1 vote per voter. This still needs work I admit, but don't see this as being a major problem

personal views - This is an easy answer for me, as going against a promise (promise to the people that I will do the vote as I stated) would be far harder for me to go against then my own feelings. You would probably have to know me to understand this...all I can say is for me it’s an easy choice. I would be there to serve the people as they wanted, not how I want which is the problem I see with the current system.

[-df-]

Thanks for the replies.

Re the safety of the online voting, yes nothing can be 100% safe (as I put in there to begin with) but there are ways to monitor and make sure it’s as close as it can get.

I am not kidding myself here, I know its going to be one hell of an up hill struggle...but good things take time as the saying goes. If I can get in, and bring light to a new way of doing things, maybe, just maybe people will take notice. To be honest, if someone else wanted to take this idea, and run with it I would be overjoyed. I don't want to become an MP, I despise most of the people that are...and I guess that’s the problem out there at the moment, and why I want to now do this.

[xwhatsit]

You need to take a good statistics class. In particular, looking at who the sample group is in your voting scheme.

You're not likely to end up with very representative results.

[-df-]

You need to take a good statistics class. In particular, looking at who the sample group is in your voting scheme.

You're not likely to end up with very representative results.

Been there done that at uni.

The thing is...this is not limited to the people that have voted me in, it's open to every NZ'er out there. I will just need to get the message out there so people are aware that they can do this.

The more people that can get into parlament under this party...the more exposure, more votes etc...I personally think this can work...sure not for a long time...but isn't it worth starting to make a change now?

[Trudes]

Good on you for being prepared to do something about something you see a problem with, nothing I hate more than folks who sit about wingeing about crap but aren't prepared to do something about it. If you feel passionately enough about something to moan to all in-sundry, then you should feel passionately enough about it to make a change, or shut up about it!
So go forth and stand up for what you believe in.
Me, I try not to moan too much 'cause I'm too lazy to do anything about it, but if there was something that just f%&ked me off no end, maybe I would.
Good luck!

[xwhatsit]

The thing is...this is not limited to the people that have voted me in, it's open to every NZ'er out there. I will just need to get the message out there so people are aware that they can do this.

Exactly. And what sort of people will be the ones that make the effort to go to your website and vote?

It's like placing value in the results of a KB poll on matters of national importance. Or value in the results of a Slashdot poll on the RIAA. Skewed sample group.

[-df-]

Exactly. And what sort of people will be the ones that make the effort to go to your website and vote?

It's like placing value in the results of a KB poll on matters of national importance. Or value in the results of a Slashdot poll on the RIAA. Skewed sample group.

if you knew about this site when any of the laws that have been passed recently, and you felt strongly on the topic...would you use it?

[xwhatsit]

if you knew about this site when any of the laws that have been passed recently, and you felt strongly on the topic...would you use it?

If I felt strongly about the topic, I might. But that's the key -- how strong your feelings are.

If we take some odd environmental issue, for instance, such as the felling of trees in a certain forest. Perhaps 90% of New Zealanders believe it should go ahead. 10% don't. Maybe 80% of those who don't are rabid greenies who are very wound up about the issue; 95% of those who believe it should go ahead are pretty mild on the issue, and for the most part haven't heard much about it.

Only those who believe strongly about it will vote, meaning that even though the true feeling is 9:1 for, you end up with 8:4.5 against. Polls like this are far, far worse than something like a telephone poll.

Silly example with the forest, but there's plenty of other real-life examples of this which are the same.

[-df-]

If I felt strongly about the topic, I might. But that's the key -- how strong your feelings are.

If we take some odd environmental issue, for instance, such as the felling of trees in a certain forest. Perhaps 90% of New Zealanders believe it should go ahead. 10% don't. Maybe 80% of those who don't are rabid greenies who are very wound up about the issue; 95% of those who believe it should go ahead are pretty mild on the issue, and for the most part haven't heard much about it.

Only those who believe strongly about it will vote, meaning that even though the true feeling is 9:1 for, you end up with 8:4.5 against. Polls like this are far, far worse than something like a telephone poll.

Silly example with the forest, but there's plenty of other real-life examples of this which are the same.

To be honest it sounds correct to me, and until a system like this was well known and widely used the results are going to be off...but again...it all needs to start somewhere.

[davereid]

If we take some odd environmental issue, for instance, such as the felling of trees in a certain forest. Perhaps 90% of New Zealanders believe it should go ahead. 10% don't.

Yeah. My Grandad bought the land.
My Dad planted the trees.

And now someone wants a vote to see if I can cut down my trees on my land.

Or maybe we get like parts of Europe. Where most people are Islamic. Then we can (democratically) bring in Sharia law and whip women for not wearing the veil.

Give me a call, I've got my own whip - as long as it's legal I'll whip 'em !

[Street Gerbil]

Just out of curiosity, how are you going to ensure that only eligible NZ voters are voting? Don't you afraid that your website will quickly turn into an international radical left establishment similar to digg.com?

[Swoop]

Then we can (democratically) bring in Sharia law and whip women for not wearing the veil.
Hmmm.
Why does "sue bradford" pop into my head when that idea is mentioned?

[Dargor]

Despite all the problems that need to be addressed this is still a very good idea and very possible.

Those small problems are insignificant compared to how great it would be if it does work.

I would love to be able to log on to my governments web site and discuss issues, share my knowlegde where i can benifite from other peoples knowlegde and make an informed vote.

[sinned]

What's wrong with the current system? Other than in NZ a simple majority in parliament can change the fundamentals eg no free speech EFA.

The biggest issue is lack of participation. So if you don't like what MPs are doing and voting for - join the party that nearest meets your needs and influence from within. Or if you don't like any of them start your own, you won't be the first.

[Dargor]

What's wrong with the current system? Other than in NZ a simple majority in parliament can change the fundamentals eg no free speech EFA.

Yeap, the lack of participation is about the only problem i can see. And thats exactly what -df-'s plan will change. It will make participation easily avaliable to all.

[Marmoot]

A *Talkback Radio* political party where the uninformed and xenophobic can make sweeping decisions based on issues du jour?

A New Zealand where:

- There are no Asian immigrants or immigrants from countries whose residents are not white, rich and English speaking
- Foreign investment is prohibited
- Tourism is banned
- People can only buy goods and services manufactured in New Zealand
- All businesses are closed at weekends and on public holidays
- Corporal punishment is reintroduced to schools
- A death penalty is imposed for certain crimes
- All sport is broadcast free-to-air
- Etc


That sounds so familiar....wait, Iran? Afghanistan? Old Russia?

[jrandom]

I have met the Average Kiwi Voter.

I shudder at the thought of legislation directly enacted by braying mobs thereof.

The original Athenian 'direct democracy' only enfranchised adult males who had completed military training, with criminals, bad debtors and the like excluded. Not such a bad call, really.

Further limiting voting to those who pass a certain material bar, such as property ownership or tax contributions, is another way of preventing derelicts and ne'er-do-wells from sticking their oar in.

Allowing the bottom half of society's bell curve to significantly influence its regulatory process is not a terribly smart idea.

[sinned]

I have met the Average Kiwi Voter.

I shudder at the thought of legislation directly enacted by braying mobs thereof.

The original Athenian 'direct democracy' only enfranchised adult males who had completed military training, with criminals, bad debtors and the like excluded. Not such a bad call, really.

Further limiting voting to those who pass a certain material bar, such as property ownership or tax contributions, is another way of preventing derelicts and ne'er-do-wells from sticking their oar in.

Allowing the bottom half of society's bell curve to significantly influence its regulatory process is not a terribly smart idea.

Couldn't agree more with the quote in red - that now describes NZ. The socialist coup now just depends on the effective implementation and policing of the EFA.

[Pixie]

A *Talkback Radio* political party where the uninformed and xenophobic can make sweeping decisions based on issues du jour?

A New Zealand where:

- There are no Asian immigrants or immigrants from countries whose residents are not white, rich and English speaking
- Foreign investment is prohibited
- Tourism is banned
- People can only buy goods and services manufactured in New Zealand
- All businesses are closed at weekends and on public holidays
- Corporal punishment is reintroduced to schools
- A death penalty is imposed for certain crimes
- All sport is broadcast free-to-air
- Etc

Aaah! the good old days

[Oakie]

The thing is...this is not limited to the people that have voted me in, it's open to every NZ'er out there.

Well, those with internet access anyway. I'm just thinking that lower socio-economic families who may not have PCs may not get as much say as the more affluent.

Not a bad idea though and I'm sure there'll be the odd MP out there who will take their constituents e-mailed views into account when they vote. Well, perhaps not.

[Street Gerbil]

A *Talkback Radio* political party where the uninformed and xenophobic can make sweeping decisions based on issues du jour?

A New Zealand where:

- There are no Asian immigrants or immigrants from countries whose residents are not white, rich and English speaking
- Foreign investment is prohibited
- Tourism is banned
- People can only buy goods and services manufactured in New Zealand
- All businesses are closed at weekends and on public holidays
- Corporal punishment is reintroduced to schools
- A death penalty is imposed for certain crimes
- All sport is broadcast free-to-air
- Etc


That sounds so familiar....Russia?

Yep. Sounds about right. And a mob of well organized "Putinjugand" youths ensuring that everybody votes correctly.

[Lias]

- There are no Asian immigrants or immigrants from countries whose residents are not white, rich and English speaking
- Foreign investment is prohibited
- Corporal punishment is reintroduced to schools
- A death penalty is imposed for certain crimes
- Etc


Sounds good to me..

[Hitcher]

Sounds good to me..

And many others too. There's the worry.

[Bass]

Yeap, the lack of participation is about the only problem i can see. And thats exactly what -df-'s plan will change. It will make participation easily avaliable to all.

But..... but ..... but..... I remember a referendum where some huge majority were in favour of reducing the number of MP's - I forget the actual split but it was something like 85% for the reduction. It wasn't a binding referendum and the govt chose to ignore it.

So even when we do participate, the bastards do what they want anyway.

My point is that the method already exists and is probably representative of the true spread of opinion. Clumsy and expensive? Well yes, but you don't get much of value for nothing.

What we really need is some way to force the bastards to listen.

[Street Gerbil]

What we really need is some way to force the bastards to listen.

Well, that's simple. You just vote your bastard into the office. If s/he has enough followers, it might even work.

[Lias]

And many others too. There's the worry.

I do believe its a little thing called democracy :bash: