myata

The partisan, binary FPTP system claims to protect the society against political extremes. But it comes at a serious, one can say, huge cost. Let's see: - Engendering and developing extreme partisanship: check. Important is not to find and develop best solutions and policies for the society, but to beat the opponent. To the point where little or nothing else matters. - Creating an insulated political system, closed in itself with no incentives to learn, renew and adapt: done. The reality is the proof. All of the FPTP systems in the first world are cemented for like, ever. - Stimulating a political culture of laziness and entitlement, with no place for competition, or in some cases, even answering legitimate questions. - Moreover, while preventing marginal representation of marginal groups that would have been moderated in a real representative system by the rest of the political landscape, it can create a much more serious problem, because by the virtue of practically guaranteed place in the default duo (reality check), if one party decides to go off the rails it is brought right into the political mainstream, to stay there. Normalized and stamped for the society, this is your new normal (and the new frame of reference). This is like to fix a mice infestation they would bring in a gunpowder barrel that can blow up the whole house. A race to the bottom, death spiral scenario. There are no rational benefits that outweigh these risks. None. Only mental laziness, complacency and entitlement. Binary system is a danger for the democracy. The question is not if, when.

An interesting view, but OK how should we organize this "tribal council" so that it actually reflects the interests of the society rather than its own? And what if people do have different ideas and views who and how would decide which ones to follow?

Are you reading something else, somewhere? This topic has nothing to do with CBC.

Sure. In Canada you get to choose between political "groups" Liberals; Conservatives; and the garbage bin. You sure can choose any of those. By only a minor modification of the meaning of "choice".

In your view, a bunch of disconnected politicians in quasi-parties who do not have to listen nor compete fairly based on the quality of the vision and ideas would represent it better? People of different backgrounds and convictions work together in any profession. Policies and solutions are discussed thoroughly and from different angles. It definitely results in a better quality of decisions. What's wrong with making our political system work like that too? It's not a wish but a requirement in a modern society not for outstanding policy really, but just for anything above the level of mediocrity.

Let's imagine a world where bullies are free to do what they like if they feel themselves stronger. Putins, Xis, Uns any kind of dictator scum just doing invading, burning and bombing to dust whatever and wherever they like. In that kind of world, to have at least some safety folks would be looking for some protection, right? But we aren't taking anybody under our protection, we are whimpering and yawning at the most obvious case before our eyes, there won't be an easier, more obvious one because can't be, logically. So where would they turn to? And how long would it be before you're under your little umbrella looking at the host of brutal dictator thugs all around, with the resources of the world and zillions of nukes they learned to punch? Would it look like a better option to you?

I can't but agree. A complex modern society cannot be managed effectively without understanding and reflecting its structure and interests.

Well, it would make sense to establish a party based on some clear stable principles that resonate with a part of the population. That way you wouldn't need to introduce yourself every election time. But of course, it's entirely normal for parliamentary parties to form government and opposition coalitions, even of different ideological stripes.

Of course. And that would be fixed too.

Do we have to teach in schools that people come in at least two genders? I think the best the society, school included, can do is to treat is as normal. Nothing to be hated, and not a cause to celebrate. Just another normal school kids. Then, humans have brains and should be able to figure it out. It's just not something governments should get themselves into. Outside of anything illegal of course.

An election or two after the change. Shouldn't take too long. What I think: CPC would split into two or three fractions: progressive or "red tories"; traditional soc cons; and further right nationalist maybe along the lines of PPC. Liberals split into two fractions: right of center and left. The right of center may join with the progressive faction of CPC to make a national right of center liberal market party. NDP splits into left of center - labor, and far left. Left of center NDP and left Liberals make a national left of center, European-like socialist party. We may have an immigrant party and of course, Greens (that's seven) Regional parties, at least BQ, Alberta Rose and possibly Ontario and the Maritimes (Ocean party?) It's going to be fun! And more importantly, represent the composition and the interests of the modern democratic society. Not some dusty script two centuries old.

Would be an interesting and much needed development in the stale political atmosphere in the country. But before setting up new parties (easy) one needs a normal multi-party parliamentary system that is simply not possible without fair representation. That would be the hard one. And without it, the news doesn't worth the attention a storm in a cup. Here's a idea of a practical project: all groups that are interested in the change set up a federal party, jointly, state the purpose clearly, and take it to a win, maybe after a few elections. It needs to be done only once, then breaking into parties would make all the sense.

The election won't change or fix anything. Can't. But it will be a crucial sanity test for the political system, and the society. 1. Will the Republican party nominate Trump? Grave consequences for the party and the society: normalizing third style world politics and further erosion of the democratic system. 2. If yes, what part of the population would vote for him? Shows exactly how close the country is mentally to letting go of the democracy. Only year and a bit for the answers. As for the positive prospects, a renewal is needed desperately but where and how could it come from? Partisan binary politics will destroy democracy.

Some folks here are little short of a live incarnation of Star Wars jedi trick only with a huge negative minus. Like what would it take to fall for a fat, dump good for nothing pathological liar? Like everything he touches is a failure. Is it the ultimate in mindless worshiping, I'd like to hope? but afraid not we humans always find a way to do better.

Kiss Trump and his buddies Putin and Un in their ass*s. They may not even notice but it'll make you happy for the day. And that's pretty much all ones like you are good for. Bye stinky foxie.

Don't run away. You do something and make it clear who you are for ... a long time. But why anyone normal would do that? That can easily be a test of sanity, and normality. Tons of smart words and one act puts it all in the order. Just like that. Little foxie's fav Idol with Putin and Un. Admirable, is it?

Right, rationalizing Hitler of our days. Anything can be rationalized and explained by someone who turned off their brain and conscience. Nothing new here, nada. But here's the thing, the jerk is just as dumb as he's full of it. Remember how he "fixed" Un by talking - and that's the best he can do. Someone will have to clear the mess. The dictator thugs would play him around the finger laughing but when, who could be dump enough to put a jerk like that in the management chair? And maybe there will be someone around to prevent it turning into a big mess. And maybe, there won't. Like anything was promised and assured. I'd like to take a note here of that little foxie "my fav Idol with Hitler" like. Let's have it, even for the record. One can't pretend to be dumb or naive to not understand what it means. No you cannot.

Trump and Hitler, you mean? Why being shy, c'mon he'll love it he admires brutal violent thugs, Putin, Un all the great company with so much "credibility". Can't think of a better demonstration of the core problem: the entropy works on the society, and with time, from conscious and responsible citizenrt it can become a populace. It wouldn't think how to keep the democracy working, fix it, and renew it, but get lazy and dump and through at it any and all kind of garbage only to see what happens. Yes, all of this happened countless times before. Somehow, it has to be in our genes. This is what trumps have done, do and will do: they make you loose your reason, thought and responsibility. They diminish, throw away and mix with garbage anything, only to show you yes Joe you can, no thoughts no responsibility necessary and why don't you just follow me to try it.. again. This is pretty much like Nazism happened any so many of great upheavals in history. The binary political system from funny relic is becoming a real danger for the society. Getting through the election won't be enough, and wouldn't even begin to address this problem. No great system is guaranteed to last forever, if citizens decide to part with reason and responsibility.

Get Hitler and Czechoslovakia in one room; get Stalin and Finland in one room. Next stop, WWII. There's nothing that isn't known here. The guy is a loudmouth self-admiring populist jerk. He'll say anything to make himself the center of attention. Not a secret here, in the plain view. Now, the only question remains, what part of the population, former democratic citizenry won't bother to think; or choose turn off their brains, willingly and voluntarily. This is the same old question. Nothing is ever promised or guaranteed.

And with it, three centuries old American democracy? Ohoh

They will have to show it. Any party that would nominate a jerk like him, would essentially disqualify itself from being a part of a functional working democracy. The failure would be too severe and grotesque. And unfortunately, in a binary political system it may cause unraveling of the entire system. Either political discourse would drop to the third world level, and get only worse with each new low. Or, at least for some time, the other party would rule unchallenged. And neither is good as history clearly shows. A failure to change and renew may cost dearly in the final account: an evolutionary dead-end.

"I like that he said that," he told Welker. "Because that means what I’m saying is right. I would get him into a room. I’d get Zelenskyy into a room. Then I’d bring them together. And I’d have a deal worked out." NBC Because when Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Chaushesku, Castro please insert any dictator thug here, praises your idea it means that it's going to work, right? For who, though? Get into a room a brutal, murderous rapist. Then, get there his innocent victim. Get Hitler into a room with the Jews he murdered. And what? What f-ing bloody miracle would transpire? How old, morally and mentally has one to be to not see it for plain, sheer and total nonsense it is? But he's saying it publicly and aloud. I'm sure especially in the early days of WWII there were those who gave their ear and even in some aspects at least, admired Nazi's leaders and thinkers. But it was back then and we're supposed to have memory and reason, or common sense at least. We were supposed to have learned, and remember. The guy is a jerk. He admired Putin and Un, probably still does. Here's what he's doing: not only destroying the foundations of democracy; now he is teasing you to do away with your very reason and common sense. If it doesn't make sense to your notions of reason and reality, just forget them and leave at the door. And believe whatever new daily nonsense pours out of the deep throat, you won't even notice anymore: because you aren't thinking. For yourself. Unfortunately, we humans have been known all too well to do just that. The coming one would be more than a regular election, rather the final sanity test. Nothing isn't known today about who he is and what he does. There can only be two reasons one would even in wildest dream imagine voting for the jerk, if he gets nominated: they are not thinking; or they voluntary and deliberately decided to not think, for themselves. And for that condition, alas democracy has no solutions. All the hard labors of the founding fathers would be in vain. Rome knows.

Clueless and confident in it. Will make a great candidate, for whatever toy "party".

That's your aspiring Canadian politician talking - they sure know how to fix it. Just believe and don't get in the way.

Just out of curiosity, why do we need to buy plywood from the States? Even funnier, where did it get there from could it be from here, just in case? Why are we pumping raw oil out and have to buy gas at whatever it's sold for? For centuries now, the business of the elites has been in digging and shipping the country out. Then setting up and running import and distribution monopolies. A huge in size and immensely rich in natural resources country has never developed its own, sufficient and sustainable economy. That economy model reminds of something.. Russia maybe?