Community and democracy

[ahinton]

Indeed
like Bear baiting, you mean ?
Why is it different ?

To be fair, bear baiting is both disgusting and violent as well as being against the law of the land; whereas I don't think that one could reasonably attribute all three descriptors to the Monarchy!

You either believe in "democracy" or not surely ?
No one asked me whether I want to pay for the Royal Family ?
Why is it right for people to force me to pay for something I don't want ?

We don't all see democracy - and the obligation to pay for it in an ostensibly democratic country - in the same way; there are out-and-out Monarchists, republicans and those who don't much care either way about the future of Britain's monarchy but they all at least purport to want "democracy" and to be able to live in a "democratic" state in which one "penalty" is having to contribute towards things that they don;t personally want but that they recognise that some of their fellow citizens do (Radio 3 or no Radio 3? for example). But the monarchy was being compared to the House of Lords in this context and the argument that the former is "a tradition, cultural...part of the British identity" simply doesn't hold water on several counts, not least because (a) the latter itself has a long tradition (not that I imply support for it on those or any other grounds) and (b) whilst there IS such a thing as society, there's no such thing as "the British identity" that means anything at all here.

[Beef Oven]

You chose a distant example (Turkey) of social media having influence when there are more domestic examples, such as 38 degrees UK and Avaaz UK who create petitions that MPs have admitted cause them a great deal of discomfort; and of course the August riots in which there was some evidence of social media involvement.

So what?

[amateur51]

So what?

I was just wondering why you chose Turkey rather than possibly less florid examples close at hand.

[Beef Oven]

I was just wondering why you chose Turkey rather than possibly less florid examples close at hand.

I chose it because it is an utterly spectacular example of the power of social media.

[MrGongGong]

I don't necessarily want to be "directly asked" anything
just pointing out that so many folk (and the Kippers are prime in this) who rant on about how
"undemocratic" the EU is are at the same time ardent supporters of the Monarchy
I'm quite happy to pay for things I don't use to benefit others ....... i'm even happy to pay for Radio 1

I don't think that you can be

"an ardent democracy supporter and monarchist."

Because the institution in it's essence is anti-democratic
(Chas being the prime example )

To be fair, bear baiting is both disgusting and violent as well as being against the law of the land; whereas I don't think that one could reasonably attribute all three descriptors to the Monarchy!

hummm , maybe not all at the same time but ............(winkything)

[Beef Oven]

I don't necessarily want to be "directly asked" anything
just pointing out that so many folk (and the Kippers are prime in this) who rant on about how
"undemocratic" the EU is are at the same time ardent supporters of the Monarchy
I'm quite happy to pay for things I don't use to benefit others ....... i'm even happy to pay for Radio 1

I don't think that you can be

"an ardent democracy supporter and monarchist."

Because the institution in it's essence is anti-democratic
(Chas being the prime example )



hummm , maybe not all at the same time but ............(winkything)

Read the books (grinthing)

You bleated about not being asked, so I explained (winkthing)

The EU is undemocratic because laws are made by unelected managers with no mandate and foisted on nation state parliaments. Simple fact.

[ahinton]

I chose it because it is an utterly spectacular example of the power of social media.

That's all very well, but since at least part of the thrust of this thread originated in arguments about whether British armed forces personnel and their families should continue to be treated as outsiders to certain aspects of their nation's judicial régime, I don't see that an argument about recent evidence of the power or otherwise of social media in Turkey, however interesting it may be, is directly pertinent to the issue of certain British citizens being able or unable to take the kinds of legal action that are open to almost all other British citizens, do you?

[ahinton]

The EU is undemocratic because laws are made by unelected managers with no mandate and foisted on nation state parliaments. Simple fact.

Whether or not or to what extent this might have truth in it, is it not equally pertinent to argue that Britain is at times just as much so because its elected representatives often treat their electors' desires, needs and aspiration with near-contempt? I note also that you have yet to answer my question about whether you'd be content to be victimised as a consequence of a situation in which the law of your-so-called "democratic" country were to deny you the right granted to most of your fellow citizens to mount legal challenges and seek due damages that could otherwise be awarded by a court; do you perhaps need a little more time to think about that before doing so?

That said, how refreshing to be able to participate in an emoticon-free thread!

[Beef Oven]

That's all very well, but since at least part of the thrust of this thread originated in arguments about whether British armed forces personnel and their families should continue to be treated as outsiders to certain aspects of their nation's judicial régime, I don't see that an argument about recent evidence of the power or otherwise of social media in Turkey, however interesting it may be, is directly pertinent to the issue of certain British citizens being able or unable to take the kinds of legal action that are open to almost all other British citizens, do you?

No Al, that was the other thread. This thread is about community and democracy, which is not limited to the UK.

What happened in Istanbul is directly pertinent to the whole concept of democracy everywhere.

[MrGongGong]

The EU is undemocratic because laws are made by unelected managers with no mandate and foisted on nation state parliaments. Simple fact.

One could argue that there is more mandate in the EU than in the current UK government
and anyway the laws are made by people appointed by OUR elected representatives , just like the police, judges , teachers etc etc
and it's not a case of "foisting" ,or maybe only it's "foisted" if you don't agree with it

This thread is about community and democracy, which is not limited to the UK.

YOu mean we ARE part of a European Community ? Goodness me I thought we weren't "part of Europe"

(cherche le troll ?)

[french frank]

Erdogan would have been home and dry without social media.

As a matter of interest, do you regard the latest general election in Turkey as having been undemocratic?

Social media can be used in a very simple way to get the engagement that is the life-blood of true democracy. It's just a different method.

I'm not sure why it should be considered more democratic than traditional elections. And I'm not sure that the Turkish riots (or the Brazil riots or the UK student riots) could be regarded as 'democratic'. They simply showed that sections of the public felt exceptionally strongly about certain matters. Even if they are large sections, it doesn't indicate that a majority felt the same way. We hail the successes when we feel we understand and agree with the protesters - but the result can be the same, whether there is justice in the cause or not. And I would probably hold (social) justice as more important than that form of 'democracy' anyway.

[french frank]

The EU is undemocratic because laws are made by unelected managers with no mandate and foisted on nation state parliaments. Simple fact.

The laws are formulated and implemented by the Commission. They are approved by our MEPs and governments elected by us.

"The EU’s standard decision-making procedure is known as 'Ordinary Legislative Procedure’ (ex "codecision"). This means that the directly elected European Parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the Council (the governments of the 27 EU countries). The Commission drafts and implements EU legislation."

Not Wikipedia this time http://europa.eu/eu-law/

[Beef Oven]

As a matter of interest, do you regard the latest general election in Turkey as having been undemocratic?

I'm not sure why it should be considered more democratic than traditional elections. And I'm not sure that the Turkish riots (or the Brazil riots or the UK student riots) could be regarded as 'democratic'. They simply showed that sections of the public felt exceptionally strongly about certain matters. Even if they are large sections, it doesn't indicate that a majority felt the same way. We hail the successes when we feel we understand and agree with the protesters - but the result can be the same, whether there is justice in the cause or not. And I would probably hold (social) justice as more important than that form of 'democracy' anyway.

The last general election in Turkey was even more in keeping with democratic principles than any previous election, due to a number od modernising tweaks. I find your question a bit strange. Why did you ask me that?

[MrGongGong]

The laws are formulated and implemented by the Commission. They are approved by our MEPs and governments elected by us.

"The EU’s standard decision-making procedure is known as 'Ordinary Legislative Procedure’ (ex "codecision"). This means that the directly elected European Parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the Council (the governments of the 27 EU countries). The Commission drafts and implements EU legislation."

Not Wikipedia this time http://europa.eu/eu-law/

I think he means (??? and I'm NOT being entirely serious Mr Van Vliet) that it's "undemocratic" because johnny foreigner gets a say .........
Given that the MEP's are elected by a fairer system than FPTP surely it's MORE democratic ?

[french frank]

The last general election in Turkey was even more in keeping with democratic principles than any previous election, due to a number od modernising tweaks. I find your question a bit strange. Why did you ask me that?

Because you brought Erdogan into the discussion. And Turkey. He seems to have had an enviably large percentage of the vote. That seems to me more democratic than riots aided by the use of social media.