Robert Taylor and idleidolidyll's political debating thread

[Bass]

It's been said that a politician's first duty is to get elected.
It's also said that a country gets the government that it deserves.
I think that there's a bit of truth in both of these lines.
However if you take them together, it makes one wonder if there's any hope no matter what we do.

[Ocean1]

It's been said that a politician's first duty is to get elected.
It's also said that a country gets the government that it deserves.
I think that there's a bit of truth in both of these lines.
However if you take them together, it makes one wonder if there's any hope no matter what we do.

There's not a scrap of truth to either of 'em. They were both uttered by politicians.

[Robert Taylor]

Dude it's pointless listing them, they're all arseholes. It doesn't matter where thay've come from or what flavour their ideologies, in order to get to the top of the political heap they've become capable of ignoring sustainable best practices in order to buy votes. That automatically makes all of them incapable of managing an economy let alone a cohesive social policy.

In order to gain control National need to buy exactly the same floating votes that Labout do, what then is the real difference likely to be? Specifically, how do we get all those clever bastards back home? and how do we get them driving our economy the way they currently are offshore?

I think I know, I just want some feedback...

Yes, you are right. Every succcessive Labour Government has pushed the goalposts further left and incoming National administrations havent been able to reset them for fear of certain electoral defeat. That much of the population has been programmed to have a ''world owes me a living mentality'' has made a certainty of that.

I have a ''fantasy solution'' but it is unprintable.

MMP certainly needs to be tossed out, a system primarily designed for post war Germany so that it would be difficult for the fascists to rise again. But here in NZ it has allowed Sue Bradford, Keith Locke and a druggie to become MPs. A good many people find that very unappetising.

[vifferman]

So why bother using someone else’s pink crayons to paint your personal picture? The questionnaire used to produce the data set for that survey is more emotively spun than most I've seen. It paints me quite a different colour to most other similar tools.

Try this one, so simple there’s little room for spin… http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

What colour are you now?

Well, on the first test, it said I was even more leftist/libertarian than the Greens (who I loathe), and 'your' test, it said I was a centrist (slightly left of centre).
I don't agree with either - they're both too simplistic.

And I'd like to think I'm more than a labelled one-dimensional cardboard cutout.
I have at least two dimensions to my character.

[Bass]

There's not a scrap of truth to either of 'em. They were both uttered by politicians.

Here we go again - I disagree
Until he is elected, he's not a politician and so getting elected must be his first duty.
Secondly, if we believe their promises and elect them on that basis without examining their record (as we tend to do) then we deserve everything we get.

I actually think that we don't pay them enough to attract any real management talent. Can you imagine the CEO of any multi-billion turnover company (rough size of our economy) working for Hulen's salary.
Cut their numbers by at least two thirds I say but pay them appropriately, and with annual performance appraisals to pre-notified objectives

[SPman]

Pay them more - the bastards will try to hang in even longer!!!!

I reckon max 2 terms, then a bullet - because by then they've lost any humanity they might have had and are happily screwing up society to their own twisted visions......

[Ocean1]

Well, on the first test, it said I was even more leftist/libertarian than the Greens (who I loathe), and 'your' test, it said I was a centrist (slightly left of centre).
I don't agree with either - they're both too simplistic.

And I'd like to think I'm more than a labelled one-dimensional cardboard cutout.
I have at least two dimensions to my character.

Tools like that do tend to reinforce stereotypes and labels, and they're spinable to get the result you'd like respondents to see. Can be instructive though, and "my" one is so simple as to be tolerably transparent and therefore less prone to rotation by the spin doctor / boogie man of your choice.

For the long term I'm not too worried about the effect of left/right drift due to cultural fashion purges and PC imposed blinkers. Human instinct is to progress, to make a better life for themselves and their kids. Any system drifting too far from that which represents a sustainable set of policies will eventually fail,, to be replaced eventually by one that allows that growth.

Believe it or not I score only slightly right-of-centre. I also score well towards the bottom of the scale wrt the trade off between risk/choice and control/security, always have, it’s an item of self reliance and self resopnsibility. That apparently makes Libertarianism the label of classic choice. I won’t argue.

The short term isn't looking promising though, this is, for now, a place for those who's grasp, (impressive as it has become) exceeds their reach. Our tall poppy syndrome has finally produced the inevitable result of rendering achievement unfashionable, unrewarding and ineffective. A great deal of the most enterprising of us either no longer live here or have gone into entrepreneurial hibernation, (excepting some of those who’s income derives from the public purse).

Re dimensions, I believe last time they counted there were 9, but I'm fooked if I know where most of them go.

[Ocean1]

Here we go again - I disagree
Until he is elected, he's not a politician and so getting elected must be his first duty.
Secondly, if we believe their promises and elect them on that basis without examining their record (as we tend to do) then we deserve everything we get.

I actually think that we don't pay them enough to attract any real management talent. Can you imagine the CEO of any multi-billion turnover company (rough size of our economy) working for Hulen's salary.
Cut their numbers by at least two thirds I say but pay them appropriately, and with annual performance appraisals to pre-notified objectives

I should use the sarcasm smiley huh?

Tongue was indeed lurking cheekwards, however I insist that there's a significant majority of politicians who can not in fact point to a voting majority, both within government and without.

Further, I insist that no inteligent voter deserves to be lied to, let alone subject to levels of dishonesty that make simple porkies seem utterly benign. Also, that it'd be just plain nice if the concept of adequate civil service didn't nescessarily always have the highest price tag attached.

[Bass]

I should use the sarcasm smiley huh?

Tongue was indeed lurking cheekwards, however I insist that there's a significant majority of politicians who can not in fact point to a voting majority, both within government and without.

Further, I insist that no inteligent voter deserves to be lied to, let alone subject to levels of dishonesty that make simple porkies seem utterly benign. Also, that it'd be just plain nice if the concept of adequate civil service didn't nescessarily always have the highest price tag attached.

Roger that - I'm rather naive from time to time

As for the rest.... well MMP can be viewed both ways I guess and I think that Civil Servant is the ultimate oxymoron

[Sanx]

go read Karl Marx, voted the greatest thinker of the 20th century

Who voted him the 'greatest thinker' of the 20th century? And should any credence be given to whoever voted him the greatest thinker of the 20th century, considering he died 17 years before the end of the 19th century?

[vifferman]

Tools like that do tend to reinforce stereotypes and labels, and they're spinable to get the result you'd like respondents to see. Can be instructive though, and "my" one is so simple as to be tolerably transparent and therefore less prone to rotation by the spin doctor / boogie man of your choice.

Yes.
III's one had four obvious categories for each answer, to put you in one of four squares on the resultant graph thingo (technical term). For many of those, I would've answered differently; instead of strongly agree/disagree, I would've said "dunno" or similar.
Even though I'm apparently more saintly than Mandela or Ghandi , the poll didn't really reveal several things about my values.

I hate (deeply and passionately) the creeping rise of safety-nazism and bureaucracy, and the slow death of personal responsibility and natural consequences.
We have become a culture of people that whenever something adverse happens cry out our mantra: "There should be a law against it!"
Or our alternative plea: "The Gummint should do something about this!"
Sadly, this self-perpetuating folly has visited on us a bland grey 'safety' that cocoons and cossets us from the dangers of personal responsibility.

While I strongly believe in helping those who genuinely can't help themselves, the current welfare culture is not working.
It helps those who know how to play the system, and actively discourages self-help and independence in favour of institutionalism and bureaucracy.
I experienced this first-hand when I was unemployed when I moved to Tauranga in 1996. Thankfully, this first encounter with WINZ (a clash of cultures/values) gave me the impetus to help myself, and I spent two years (before moving to D'Auckland) keeping myself busy by house-husbanding, odd-jobbing (painting, plastering, etc.) and doing some part-time programming and computer support.
My second experience when helping my son when he was unable to work was similarly unpleasant and made me feel rather tainted. It was only slightly less demeaning than begging on the streets (albeit more lucrative). It took some research and more than a little effort to understand the WINZ machine, as it's very much geared up towards dole-bludging rather than "a helping hand when you need it".

While I'm not a big fan of patriotism and national fervour, it disturbs me the extent to which we have sold 'our' country to foreign interests.
The Muldoon gummint of the 70's did a very bad thing selling off the silverware at plasticware prices, and we'll be reaping the consequences for a very long time.

Our culture has become very greedy, selfish and materialistic.
Moral depravity and "me first" has replaced the NooZild of olde.

[Sanx]

III, you seem to have a problem with what people mean by 'socialism' and 'capitalism'. A major part of your arguments seems to be over whether a particular action is capitalist or socialist in nature, or whether policies reflect those two economic systems. And you also seem to delight in responding to arguments by stating someone's assertion that something's capitalist or socialist in nature is down the their misunderstanding of the term.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines 'socialism' as "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy". The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as "A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole".

Likewise 'capitalism' is defined by the AHD as "An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market" and the OED as "An economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state".

Both definitions are fairly similar. And they're widely accepted by the majority of people as being accurate. Your definitions of socialism and capitalism, however, seem to change on a daily basis depending on what argument you're attempting to formulate an answer to. Assuming that others are ignorant of the 'true' meaning does no justice to whatever argument you had, nor does it show respect for anyone else.

Your statement that fascism can be aplied to governments on the left or the right is also incorrect. Extreme left governments display many of the traits of extreme right-wing governments, but as fascism was a term coined to describe Mussolini and his style of government (Fascism, from the Italian fascismo, from fascio 'bundle, political group, ' from Latin fascis 'bundle.'), it's a term inextricably linked with extreme right-wing politics. I have no proof of this, but I'd imagine that the majority of people if asked "Is Fascism right-wing or left-wing?" would respond "Right wing".

The development of language can itself be decribed as showing traits of communism. The evolution of language is defined by the will of those who speak it. Words, and the meanings of them, change over time. The 'correct' meaning of a word is the one that's accepted by the majority as being correct. Therefore, should you disagree with what everyone else means by a particular word; you're wrong - not them.

[vifferman]

Civil servants generally forget they are serving the 'civilians' and not themselves. I was not surprised at the low voter 'turnout' for the recent local body elections, if most people felt like me: what fargin difference does it really make? Aren't all politicians pretty much cut from the same cloth? Even if they start out with high hopes, great morals and brilliant ideas, how will they fare once they're in power?

I can't remember where I read it (a Terry Pratchett "Discworld" novel, perhaps?) but there was a story where the politicians and bureaucrats were all people who didn't want the job, and were given it as punishment for antisocial crimes. Brilliant! Think about it - anyone who wants to be in government is inherently unsuitable for the task. Conversely, if you don't want the job, but can get out as soon as you've performed it well, there's every incentive to be efficient.

[SPman]

Oh well - back to Thomas Jefferson

"Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct"

I have no proof of this, but I'd imagine that the majority of people if asked "Is Fascism right-wing or left-wing?" would respond "Right wing".

Yep - but, left wing / right wing, it's still the same old bird!

[Ocean1]

Yes.
III's one had four obvious categories for each answer, to put you in one of four squares on the resultant graph thingo (technical term). For many of those, I would've answered differently; instead of strongly agree/disagree, I would've said "dunno" or similar.
Even though I'm apparently more saintly than Mandela or Ghandi , the poll didn't really reveal several things about my values.

I wonder if it can really be simplified quite as far as the Libertarian's version. Maybe not, still for me it boils down to pretty much exactly those factors: "To what extent should the successful support the unsuccessful", and "To what extent should this opinion be forced upon society".

Some would have it that the right have a monopoly on the making and enforcement of rules generally not relevant to other than moral issues. Take a glance at the current bunch. There's an organisational maxim, (that I can't be fucked tracking down but which is nonetheless valid) that rules beget rules, add infinitum, and that regulation never diminishes short of dramatic social upheaval. There’s currently enough rules of all sorts that it’s near impossible to carry out any form of activity without not only encountering them but unavoidably trampling them underfoot. This, more than the left/right issue, is my most pressing concern.

Any of you who’ve built a house or managed a business in the last few years will know exactly what I mean. The focus for perfectly normal people becomes not “what’s the best cost/effective solution” but “which rules are less damaging to break”.
Any fucker who suggests he might reduce the sheer size of our central and regional governmental regulatory machinery has automatically got my vote. Especially if the first rule to go is the one that prevents me “publishing” the above opinion in election year. If no fucker is prepared to make such a suggestion then mayhap it’s time for a wee spot of social upheaval.