Governable and governance

[myata]

Answering the question in this section where it has much more relevance.

"No system is perfect, no need to go your route and destroy it in the name of anarchy..."

I can't speak for them, don't even know them but we do seem to agree on one point: like them I have no interest in being "governable".

Governing (peasants) is what kings and aristocrats did (by the way, "czars", "mandarins" in daily news stories, sounds familiar? Only an innocent saying I know). They had their fun and at times, glorious times but it was long time ago. No thanks. Old business. Boring.

Today I have a quite, no completely different idea of what public administrations are for in full, functional democracies. No,  not to "govern".

And for why this topic belongs here, in this forum let's take this one example out of uncountable many.

Nearly 80% of Canadians are against MP pay rise. Why? Can it be because it is already at ridiculous in the developed world levels (do find out), while many in the country have been struggling with daily expenses but OK that's another story. The bottom line: a great majority of citizens want something done, in a democracy.

So what?

Imagine you had, in your own home: one more time, the home that you own, a management agent like that.

"No you can't renegotiate my contract, look here and here". "No, you can't throw out that old and outdated stuff and install a modern and transparent system, your status does not allow that".

What? To whom, "not allowed"? To the citizens who are supposed to own the whole thing, and have a clear, firm opinion on the matter that an entrenched system has no interest of even noticing? Some of them are busy surviving, others couldn't care, others still forgot what critical questioning and civic responsibility is. Sure that's a choice, always such choice. But it doesn't excuse anything. It only settles the future.

I don't read pretty fairy tales but I can see and analyze what I see. The system is happy as it is, almost completely detached and absorbed in itself. It has no real need for me, the citizen only to put some pretty pics on the facade. It isn't connected and not responding. And very logically, I couldn't care about it either. Fair is fair. Perfect symmetry. Sure it will try to preach something they always do because like deities of old they come to believe that their words can move worlds. I'm not listening but I can see. It will try to make me do things (like the governors above) and then I'll have to see what I could do. But no: it doesn't represent me, even on the days it decides to put on its representation gown, it's disconnected and detached from me.

And so, to conclude, the dilemma you are setting is meaningless and silly. A bad, hopelessly outdated, nonsensical and dysfunctional solution is not the only alternative to chaos; obviously. The only reason you like to say that it is because you accepted the impossibility, de jure and de facto, of any meaningful change. Then yes, we can see that for you that letting go of an archaic, funny way beyond that fuzzy old guy just plain ridiculous in this day and age arrangement would seem like a door to a dangerous and unpredictable darkness, utmost chaos.

This is what free will looks like, but you forgot.

Edited January 21, 2023 by myata

[myata]

And an apt illustration, right out of mailbox. My MP is inviting me for a family sleight ride, free, thanks for the great MP caring for her constituents.... wait. Let's try to translate it.

Having pocketed her $4K plus "automatic annual rise", she's having the ride arranged through some MP / government office. Every clerk in the office will be paid, even for moving the paper from one table to another. The ride, with all the bureaucratic overheads will be expensed to some great government outreach program and through the black hole / bottomless bucket appear in our Universe as a budgeted item. Paid by the taxpayer. That's me.

Get it: I get a h-ing sleigh ride at an unknown to me cost no questions taken no answers given that I don't even need and never asked for. MP gets her annual rise and the satisfaction of a well executed public duty. Dinner well earned and with it, a Caribbean vacation and that would be just on the rise.

French queen in the infamous example two centuries back gave away brioches also paid by her peasants, at least there could be some use in it. But MPs handing out sleigh rides, seriously? And it wouldn't even glimpse on them what's wrong in this picture. They are lightyears away already, in another Universe of their own.

Edited January 21, 2023 by myata

[myata]

Blind is as blind sees. This has some f-ing NK overtones already and no, you wouldn't notice great democracy business going smoothly. Happy citizens on a happy sleigh ride generously gifted to them by their Great Representative (with hand firmly stuck, no just couldn't be disentangled from their pocket). You wouldn't even notice.

 

[myata]

10 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

Because Kim, is calling himself Democratic, but he is nothing of.   

Sure, no argument about him. What about your very own employee-representative, with a hand firmly stuck in your pocket? Can they call themselves democratic, when 80% of citizens want them to stop the happy gobbling party already, but they'd rather pretend it's happening in some other Universe?

On a deep, quintessential order of things, are these two really, essentially different behaviors?

Edited January 21, 2023 by myata

[myata]

1 hour ago, Contrarian said:

I don't know, in Singapore as an example I told you, they pay politicians very high to excel, and if you are caught stealing, there is no negotiation,

Now you said it, let's see what we have here, shall we?

Before somewhere around 2000/2001 MPs had a salary of around 70K and a tax-free allowance for expenses. With a median income in the country of 20K it would still be higher than most anywhere in the developed world (MP wealth factor 3.5). Then, anyone how worked in a real company would know that expense allowance is not your other pocket. Obvious, no? So if at any point parliamentary bureaucracy made it feel and look otherwise it would be nothing less than mishandling of taxpayer funds. Do you agree? Does it make sense? That's one.

Two, somewhere around 2001 they decided to "roll" it into one taxable salary of over 100K (wealth factor 5). Question one: why would you do that? What would be the point? Two: does it mean that all business expenses were from there on to be paid out of the salary? That would be a fair equivalent of the state of affairs before the change, though makes no sense, just none, does it? But I'm almost sure this is not the case (we may have someone here to confirm, one way or the other). If any of the expenses before the 2001 trick were expensed to taxpayer after, this would be, clearly, a deliberate and conscious manipulation and misinformation of the public with the purpose of group gain. Do you agree?

But that's not the end of it. Some time later, anyone can find the details, they invented themselves the idea of automatic annual rises that is very different from indexation by inflation as for the rest of us and much later. They were even fine with being branded "employees" (sic) only to get to the desired end. Why did they do it? Because they can? can you come up with any other reasons?

Four: for a while, for years now, people, citizens have been telling it: that would be enough. Time to slow down, end the merry party. Nope. Can't see anything! Not happening. Here, see? Entitled to automatic entitlements! Sorry have to run the business, you know.

Now stand back, and look fairly and objectively at that entity, politico-social creature. Did and does it behave (as in pp. 1-4 above) as your honest and responsible associate, something you could trust? Or like something that will use almost anything, deliberate confusion, misinformation, manipulation for its own group, translating to personal, gain?

And based on the objective look, with information in your hands, decide: should you, and can you trust it, and keep trusting it to work in your interests rather than its own? MP wealth factor: 4.5, higher than most anywhere in the democratic world. Norway: still under two.

Edited January 21, 2023 by myata

[myata]

2 hours ago, Contrarian said:

Your a man that has an unique ability to find flaws in every current system it seems,

You are deliberately, consciously and persistently blind. You absolutely preclude yourself from seeing and taking in the obvious, glaring reality. This, above is no isolated, random "flaw", far from and far more than that. It is: a pattern, behavioral one. Selfish; deceptive and manipulative, arrogant and entitled; irresponsible, duplicitous and hypocritical trying to hide the obvious and adorn it into selfless service robes. Over the course of two decades multiple administrations and elections. No I insist no way of escaping the obvious: it is a persistent pattern.

Why would you twist allowances into "indemnities" and other bs wizy-wordy stuff when everybody calls it for what it is? What was the "employee" nonsense all about? How could anyone trust that squishy thingy that will say and do pretty much anything to get its hands on some more public dough? That's what it has done and keeps doing no matter what already in plain daylight and shamelessly. How could anyone in their right, objective mind deny or ignore that?

 

 

Edited January 21, 2023 by myata

[myata]

2 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I don't know what you are talking about really.

That is your problem. Before you even begin to think about changing the reality you should try to see it first, clearly and objectively, not so? How come there's a text that outlines precisely, a course of events over two decades, no random flaws or coincidences - and you just didn't see anything, a blank page?

[myata]

5 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

but why would I change the reality if it benefits me and millions others that made it? I am not into self mutilation.

This is called: intelligence. Depending on an entity that has shown a persistent pattern of misleading and duplicity is never a good idea whatever temporary benefits (aka cookies). You just cannot trust its nature because a) it has demonstrated it clearly, and b) an intelligent entity should observe and note all events that may affect its progress.

8 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

anarchist which pushes for Marx undercover,

And again: no obscure ideologies only logic and intelligence. Above there, you were shown facts. They are recorded facts of this reality and together they form a pattern of persistent behavior. In evolution, it's never a great idea to ignore the environment even if you found this juicy patch that may last you for a while.

[myata]

4 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

So anyone that made a comfortable living, carreer, and made money in the West does not have intelligence?

No sorry it has to be too complicated. Maybe the reality will have more success in such cases it works that way sometimes but not always, certainly not. I give up, you win.

[myata]

15 minutes ago, myata said:

in the West

Are you talking to yourself, just like those MPs? Don't really need the outside world, why?