Scallywag
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Scallywag
-
-
41 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
So all parties would be dissolved
Nothing gets dissolved, ridings electing independents would simply have their voice heard instead of having it replaced by that of a party. If enough independents were elected, parties would be less likely to get a majority and they would have to start listening to MPs serving their ridings directly. If the parties remain obstinate and dictatorial they may well end up in the bin, it would be their choice. If there were enough independents to instigate change, they would represent their constituents’ best interest in contributing to that change. That goes with creating an independent future.
I don’t understand why MPs would be competing over local issues, each riding would still only have one MP. Provinces would continue to do what provinces do.
Redrawing the maps may be one of those rare cases in which the objectivity of raw data might trump the subjectivity of people.
-
14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
But you probably want to phase this idea in.
As electing independents has always been an option the electorate can change parliament without asking for the parties’ blessing. At any time any group in any riding can select and elect a candidate who will vote according to their wishes. Any riding could change before the next election. Collectively, the electorate would ensure it would be a slow process. The argument has been an independent has no voice in parliament. Thanks to whips and party structure it is the opposite. Independents can vote as they wish, party candidates generally have to answer to the party powerful. They vote as a very small group, generally in the Liberal party, want them to vote. The results of that are very obvious and not satisfactory to a growing number of Canadians.
Ridings feeling they don’t get proper or adequate attention could garner more by sending independents to parliament. Just a couple of mavericks in a riding could get the ball rolling.
-
20 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
the best ones is going to take a shit ton of votes
There would only be 338 votes, the MP for each riding would be the decision maker, not the party powerful. How the MP arrives at the decision is up to the electorate. The difference being, that politician would have to please the constituents rather than the party. Apathy, a very powerful force, would still be a major player but there would be a greater reason not to employ it.
-
58 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
overhauling the whole parliamentary process
If an independent MP kept in touch with the riding (something of an obligation?) why would it be any more time consuming than it should be presently? (Is the time saving in the party specifying how to vote and therefore not having to bother with the riding at all?) Is there a quicker, more cost effective way to allay Canadians concerns about proper representation than overhauling the whole parliamentary process?
-
53 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
Sounds good on paper, and i do some how like the idea of having citizens vote for certain things. but there is a lot of fatal flaws in this idea,
1. I think those who have shown no interest in any important issue can be depended on to continue pursuing their disinterest. I also think there are a lot of highly-informed, highly-intelligent Canadians who are interested...they’re not all MPs.
2. If everyone puts their own interest first that would create the national interest. There is no sense for someone in Calgary trying to choose the best option for someone in Montreal.
Isn’t that the same initiative that drives people’s votes for party candidates? The only difference I see there is the poetry of party politics versus the prose of reality.
Tough decisions like helicopters?
3. It would seem more equitable if all Canadians presented new ideas, not just the same families that have been presenting all the ideas all along. Thirty-nine million people usually boils down to three countable opinions in politics: yeas, nays and abstentions. It’s really just a matter of how we get there.
What sides? There are options, individuals and communities. We have become too reliant on information of unknown or little known sources. We just need to think for ourselves and give others the same respect.
-
20 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
We have given up. I think it is time for a new political party to emerge
What are the benefits of parties in a time when everyone can be in touch with everyone else in seconds? Why do we need highly-paid information couriers bringing the latest from Ottawa? Why do we need small groups of people making big decisions for us? We use the Internet for everything from banking to presenting images of ourselves in every conceivable situation, why not parliament? If millions of Canadians can make political decisions resulting in the election of 338 MPs, surely those few folks could make open and honest decisions after consulting with their constituents. The only protection required would be for reactionary government and that wouldn’t have to cost as much as bureaucracy.
-
We decidedly need change. I'll wait for the delivery.
-
Heaps of data about us are influencing more decisions effecting us than we are. Many of those decisions are political. That’s not good. The information is too often of questionable origin and is collected in questionable ways. Data is always collected from a point of view, it is always analyzed from a point of view and piled together it doesn’t represent any Canadian or collection of Canadians. We are not items on neatly ordered shelves in a warehouse. We are not data points, we are fully human, fully alive and should be treated as such. We should understand ourselves as such. Our first reaction shouldn’t be ‘there’s nothing I can do’. We can stop saying that for starters.
AI works in stock management; for infinitely complex things such as life and the politics it generates it’s not up to much. It has no imagination, just data and algorithms programmed by humans with a mandate. Data isn’t real, it’s an alphanumeric representation of reality in the way a plastic banana is representative. When anyone treats you as a widget, stand up and prove them wrong.
There is an election looming, this is our big role. It’s our opportunity to prove we are someone, not something.
-
10 hours ago, WestCanMan said:
Separation is important. Canada sucks, bigtime.
Politics is global. Political power is global. I don’t see how creating a less significant subset of this country will help solve any problem. Canadians, for the most part, are not using the political power we have. No solution to any problem we have now will come from continuing to do what we have been doing or emulating it with a new identity or party.
We may have to get actively involved, even if it means socializing (as in person) for a few hours every month.
-
1 hour ago, Nefarious Banana said:
would you vote for a separation type party?
I don’t see separation or parties as a viable solution to any of the comparatively small issues Canada faces. We have the technical ability to distribute decision making across the country and include all concerned Canadians in the process. There are very powerful entities around the world who may not have our best interest at heart. It is much harder for them to influence 338 independent representatives answering directly to the ridings of 38 million people than twenty or so. We don’t need to break the country up into smaller political pieces, we just need to allow all the pieces to have equal rights and opportunities.
-
A couple of years ago, while reviewing my untenable position on politics, I concluded it was a fixed race. The Liberals have the best marketing (who could forget AdScam), the most famous celebrities, the best hairdressers and makeup artists...they know theatrical production. They know what sells and the professionals who can deliver it. Other than a handful of people, how does that serve Canadians?
After far more consideration than the situation deserved I usually did the near-equivalent of destroying my ballet, I voted for an also-ran party. Not wanting to betray my better judgment I thought about what I could do. The concentration of media usually presents two options; vote Liberal or don’t. As always, when the presented options are inadequate, I chose an unlisted alternative. Independents seemed a good idea, if for no greater reason than to have the parties genuinely notice the rest of Canada. Apparently the concept of independents doesn’t exist in our realm. Mention of such an option is usually met with a long silence followed by a return to a responsible discussion on politics. Occasionally, there is a ‘wouldn’t work’ thrown in.
The media once promoted free love with reckless abandon – it wasn’t. Now it’s all about free money – I wonder. Parties, to varying degrees, are given the economic power to present the narrow spectrum of possibilities as a rainbow bridge to an amazing future. Before buying a bridge – it’s your money they use - it’s advised to check the load capacity and cost. Independents serving only the community would have no such power. They would have to appear in public without the marketing or production departments and present locally pertinent ideas. They would have an obligation to listen...even if it’s in the changing room at the gym. We would have to learn to use that voice in parliament to our advantage.
From time to time I like to check I am not confusing good luck with good planning. Or good marketing with good intentions.
-
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:
1. If you think that we squander money, it may be that you don't see value in what we're spending on. If there are a lot of people who agree with you then that means we have a broken 'public'
2. This is unclear to me - what are you saying, that our new economics of debt isn't grounded in common sense ?I definitely don’t see value in some of the things on which we spend it. MPs spending hours (days?) smiling and wishing old folks happy birthday is important. Those sales calls could be managed for a lot less than MPs cost. The public is a major component of our political problems.
I understand use of the term ‘common sense’ even less than faith economics so I’ll just watch what happens. Currencies, as I understand it, are controlled by a small global group with their best interests in mind, not ours. Money is a paltry deity and a popular one. Economics, as a social science, fails the repeatable results test. Maybe I am just being pessimistic but I feel concern.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, myata said:
Where's the difference who can point it?
Jack and Jill, their children and grandchildren would need to work hard to provide the money required to pay themselves more. Politicians don't have to change a thing. It’s odd we elect people who see squandering money as a privilege of office but are frugal with ourselves. Fortunately, frugality has no place in the new economics. All the king’s horses and all the king’s men have been rebranded to appeal to a new, more informed audience. I wonder if all that information is cluttering up our minds.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, myata said:
So which party wants to take the lead in this very worthy, highly equitable and in great Canadian spirit of togetherness undertaking?
They will all commit to such a worthy notion once their scriptwriters can get something out to them.
Action, that's quite another matter. The process is too long for the cameras to catch in a short eye-gripping way.
-
In a world of competing global information systems, every one delivers misinformation based on individual points of view. Those points of view are usually created by our choices of those information sources which, in turn, confirm them. CBC, which appears to be the marketing department for the Liberal Party, isn’t doing the Liberals a world of good so I don’t worry about it too much...although paying for it feels more like tithing a religion I don’t endorse than a nation building investment. We may profit more by getting our own 338 houses in order by active, in person involvement. From there we can rebuild community and networks of communities rather than having questionable two-dimensional facsimiles of reality constantly delivered to our pockets and our walls. Presently the flow of all things political is from parliament to Canada, we need to redirect that flow. Choosing new media celebrities won’t help. We need to send real people doing real things for real Canadians - all Canadians.
-
Picking a party based on media celebrities designed and managed for ridings thousands of kilometers away is like picking a bride – also created thousands of kilometers away – from the Internet. It’s crazy!
The best representation for every riding is a problem-solver already living in and contributing to the riding. That person would know the people, the problems, and could understand arising situations better than one chosen to represent a party to the riding. Such an MP would, through local consultation, solve problems through knowledge and experience, not cut-and-paste textbook solutions. There would be no fail-safe position (the party made me do it) for anyone not following through as agreed.
Canadians need to act now to replace the modern equivalent of town-criers with a proper, well-informed, well-intended representative. Independents could cooperate without a party structure or a whip. While their voice may be small to start, at least it wouldn’t always be in compliance with the party powerful.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:
CBC is a spreader of disinformation
We have become so enthralled with our information model of reality it has, for many, replaced it. People drive into lakes or disappear on ever diminishing dirt paths because the GPS indicates the highway goes there. The experience of seeing the obvious and the traditional reasoning that follows presents no competition to digital information. (To be fair, sacred texts and king’s decrees predate questionable ‘scientific’ studies and facts to suit every occasion.) The same thing happens with huge walls of remarkably realistic sights and sounds in our homes and on our streets. In the binary world of celebrity politics the effect is particularly acute. Much of what is real does not get captured or distributed electronically. What does appear is a final product polished by some of the best marketing people in the business using the best equipment our money can buy.
The best option we have is to take control of our information and our politics. Olds, Alberta (https://o-net.ca/about-o-net/) and many other cities and towns own and operate their own segment of the Internet. It takes initiative. ‘Dark fibre’ is often available to circumvent obstinate providers refusing to provide links to the world at large. Sending an independent MP to represent the riding in parliament also takes initiative...as well as cooperation and a determination to shop locally. We owe it to our families – past and future – to manage what we have been given in a manner that ensures it remains in our families.
-
1 hour ago, RedDog said:
I see the "information age" as simply indoctrinating people.
Information is terrific when it complements thinking, it's terrible when it replaces it. Unfortunately, many meetings and conversations sound increasingly like chapter and verse. It would be more convincing if the person doing the quoting knew the source and intention of the very important free information. 'Facts' are my favourite; they come complete with all the required thinking finished for you. It's like a drive-thru meal for your mind.
-
Politics has become so distant and professionally staged it is overwhelming our senses, leaving emotion – particularly fear – to play the role of reason. The cost of replacing community with floor-to-ceiling media is huge and will continue to take a greater toll until the voices we hear and the heads we see talking include those of members of our communities. Celebrity and representation are antithetical. Media-generated celebrity is good for selling hamburgers, not good for representing Canadians.
We have the technology to fight back, we just need the will. The best defense we have against invasive technology is local control over the information delivery system. Fortunately, that capability is designed into internet protocols. A national network of independent communities with independent MPs would work equally well, be there 10,000 nodes or ten. Every riding has the talent to maintain a node. An opportunity to participate in such a learning project would be very welcome to people of all ages. It would be a great start to rebuilding community with the sense of purpose and contribution we have lost. Having politicians represent the riding to parliament rather than parties to the riding is just one of the benefits.
-
3
-
-
Unfortunately, real news costs real money. Even then, there is a cost/value issue. Maybe the instant nature of news has lent it too much importance. How much of what is deemed important today has any value in a month or two?
-
Blaming others is not a solution, it’s an absolution. Politicians don’t elect themselves, the electorate elects them, and then we start doling out the blame. We can’t send media creations to Ottawa and expect competent politicians to arrive. Whatever Canada is becoming, it starts with Canadians.
There was a time, not so long ago, we may have been able to engineer a better future if we were lucky enough to vote for statesmen. Not anymore. Today, we need problem-solvers. Words aren’t working. No Newfoundland fisher has ever talked the crew’s way out of a storm. No prairie farmer has ever negotiated away the devastation caused by bad weather. They both have to navigate their way through banks and buyers – as every other business owner – before the benefits can be realized.
The problem solvers we need are plentiful and in wide distribution. They are Canadians from coast to coast to coast. They are in every riding in the country. Furthermore, they don’t source historic, well-documented (marketed) solutions for problems with surface similarities, they create proper solutions on the fly using experience-based knowledge. Information for them is a starting point, not the solution. We can no longer afford to be overwhelmed by loose-fitting, impressively-accurate statistical solutions that are beautifully presented and completely unsuitable.
Soon, Canada will be getting a crash course in reality. Neither the environment nor the economy can be tricked by vacuous political glad-handing, empty promises or smiling celebrities generated as required by media. The upcoming challenges will create opportunities for any party that presents realistic, comprehensive options riding by riding; a party that respects and appeals to thinking Canadians. There are far too many to ignore. Those opportunities do not include parties handing out fairy-godmother promises more suited to a past that never existed or an electorate that acts as if they just won free shopping at the bank.
I hope the difficulties we face will cause us to realize this great country was built by Canadians working together. We need Canadians to guide the future if we are to have one as Canadians. The biggest bang for the buck will come from elected representatives listening to those who will be providing those bucks, not those who propose ways to spend them...many times over. If parties are unwilling to offer proper representation for Canadians, then Canadians need to elect independents. At least they would not be committed to doing as they are told by the party elite.
-
2
-
Bridge in Troubled Waters
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted · Edited by Scallywag
Millions of Canadians elect one MP per riding in a short time. That couple of hundred MPs would have the wherewithal to quickly select various members for various tasks. The selection could change at any time. There is no need to form a government – one has already been elected – or turn it into a team sport.
Maps would be redrawn regularly based on specific criteria with every person recognized as equal. That is not a task for politicians to ponder, that is a straight up accounting function. That’s a job for audited data.
When power and a large number of people are involved, ritual is soon to follow. That prescribed order brings familiarity, comfort and control to some at the exclusion of others. As the country has grown and moved about, our political rituals are no longer suitable for Canada. Rituals are being questioned in institutions across the globe. We are not who we were, we are the product of our past, not members of it. Whether we agree with the questioning of ritual or not, it is going to happen; it’s evolution. If enough Canadians still detect political residue from the divine right of kings and town criers than they must be heard as well. Not listening would be far more damaging than listening.