topic Re: How could a 1 party system be good? in Community Spirit

How could a 1 party system be good?

freakiness — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:32 GMT

With posters taking on the views of their favourite shock jock or blogger and salivating over the prospect of Labor being annihilated, for ever, why bother with future elections?

If there is only one party how is it possible to be a democracy?

What would be the use of future elections?

It all seems quite strange to me that people could be so gleeful about such a scenario.

Does anyone remember the bottom of the harbour schemes?

Rupe's tax refund almost seems reminiscent of those practices. Why do we adore him so much? Why is it unacceptable to question his motives and morals?

Why are we longing for a return to those sorts of practices? We would we long for a return to the days of no environmental controls and conditions?

Every day we're spammed with over emotional, vitriolic material on the potential wipe out of Labor and the Greens, by those rejoicing in the potential single party system.

What benefit could there be, apart from saving money on elections, if there is only one political party in the country?

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

amber-eyed-girl — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:57:55 GMT

I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

boris1gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:59:28 GMT

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.

amber, surely as someone who has been there? you are aware that there is in fact more than one party in the DPRK.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

amber-eyed-girl — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:03:23 GMT

There is, I mentioned that even with no opposition candidate there was voting, in that area.

rather than being elected unopposed and saving the money and need for voting. There will have been more than one candidate in other areas, yes 🙂

just reread what I said, and have tried to clarify it 🙂 hope that is better

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

lakeland27 — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:04:38 GMT

we could all end up despising the same person/persons

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

amber-eyed-girl — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:08:48 GMT

But that would mean a lot less to talk about on Community Spirit

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

**meep** — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:10:46 GMT

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.

Yep. I'm familiar with "show elections"

The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has been unanimously re-elected to the country’s parliament after every single eligible person in his constituency turned out to vote – with only his name on the ballot paper.

Rather than being a democratic choice between candidates, elections in North Korea superficially provide the people with the chance to approve the politicians pre-selected by the leading party. Each ballot has a single named listed with the option to pick “yes” or “no”.

In practical terms, however, they are a powerful tool for the government to check up on the movements and potential dissidence of the population.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kim-jongun-wins-100-of-the-vote-in-north-korean-elections-9180814.html

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

freakiness — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:15:14 GMT

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.

:D:D

So we would get to waste the money to feed an ego.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

boris1gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:17:57 GMT

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.

apologies amber, I just saw the title of the thread and then the DPRK mentioned.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

boris1gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:28:42 GMT

@freakiness wrote:
With posters taking on the views of their favourite shock jock or blogger and salivating over the prospect of Labor being annihilated, for ever, why bother with future elections?

If there is only one party how is it possible to be a democracy?
What would be the use of future elections?

It all seems quite strange to me that people could be so gleeful about such a scenario.

Does anyone remember the bottom of the harbour schemes?
Rupe's tax refund almost seems reminiscent of those practices. Why do we adore him so much? Why is it unacceptable to question his motives and morals?
Why are we longing for a return to those sorts of practices? We would we long for a return to the days of no environmental controls and conditions?

Every day we're spammed with over emotional, vitriolic material on the potential wipe out of Labor and the Greens, by those rejoicing in the potential single party system.

What benefit could there be, apart from saving money on elections, if there is only one political party in the country?

regardless of the "wisdom" on here about the demise of the ALP blablabla, I don't think that it will actually happen and they really can't move much further to the right (the ALP). We could see the formation and rise of some fascist parties, as in parts of Europe. Those kind of extreme rightwing groups do often flourish when working people have been beaten down by conservative govts and unemployment is high and welfare is cut. Although that kind of thing hasn't been that popular in Australia - there was the lovely Ms Hanson who certainly came close.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

freshwater-2 — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:06:21 GMT

If there is only one party how is it possible to be a democracy?

It is not possible in a democracy......it is called fascism.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

freddie*rooster — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:11:17 GMT

@lakeland27 wrote:
we could all end up despising the same person/persons

Yes and we could give Nero some Kudo's

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

boris1gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:14:30 GMT

@**meep** wrote:
@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.
Yep. I'm familiar with "show elections"

The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has been unanimously re-elected to the country’s parliament after every single eligible person in his constituency turned out to vote – with only his name on the ballot paper.

Rather than being a democratic choice between candidates, elections in North Korea superficially provide the people with the chance to approve the politicians pre-selected by the leading party. Each ballot has a single named listed with the option to pick “yes” or “no”.

In practical terms, however, they are a powerful tool for the government to check up on the movements and potential dissidence of the population.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kim-jongun-wins-100-of-the-vote-in-north-korean-elections-9180814.html

yes interesting article, shame it isn't quite accurate - never mind.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

monman12 — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:13:31 GMT

"yes interesting article, shame it isn't quite accurate - never mind."
I mind B1G, so educate me on the inaccuracies.

"amber, surely as someone who has been there? you are aware that there is in fact more than one party in the DPRK."

North Korea functions as a single-party state under a totalitarian family dictatorship described even as an absolute monarchy[ with Kim Il-sung and his heirs.
The WPK exercises direct control over the candidates selected for election by members of the other two parties.
Two minor political parties exist but are legally bound to accept the ruling role of the WPK.

Is that accurate?

nɥºɾ

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

boris1gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 11:05:00 GMT

@monman12 wrote:
"yes interesting article, shame it isn't quite accurate - never mind."
I mind B1G, so educate me on the inaccuracies.

"amber, surely as someone who has been there? you are aware that there is in fact more than one party in the DPRK."

North Korea functions as a single-party state under a totalitarian family dictatorship described even as an absolute monarchy[ with Kim Il-sung and his heirs.
The WPK exercises direct control over the candidates selected for election by members of the other two parties.
Two minor political parties exist but are legally bound to accept the ruling role of the WPK.

Is that accurate?
nɥºɾ

no it is not accurate, monman, although I am sure anyone can find hundreds of "articles" on the net that will back up the above post. There are an amazing number of "internet experts" on all sorts of things - "educated" by the internet and the mainstream press.

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

poddster — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 20:13:30 GMT

And they are all dead wrong, misinformed, or deluded except for one a couple of people on this forum

OMG how lucky are we ?

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

gkam2 — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 22:19:36 GMT

@boris1gary wrote:
@**meep** wrote:
@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.
Yep. I'm familiar with "show elections"

The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has been unanimously re-elected to the country’s parliament after every single eligible person in his constituency turned out to vote – with only his name on the ballot paper.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kim-jongun-wins-100-of-the-vote-in-north-korean-elections-9180814.html
yes interesting article, shame it isn't quite accurate - never mind.

Perhaps Comrade Boris would be so kind as to enlighten the supposedly uninformed amongst us how this one candidate election could be a true representation of the wishes of the citizens of the Workers Paradise/

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

march470 — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 22:56:09 GMT

boris dont you and the socialuists believe in 1 party just like little kim of nth korea wouldnt that be great for the socialists mantra 1 party and the govt controlling everything

@gkam2 wrote:
@boris1gary wrote:
@**meep** wrote:
@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.
Yep. I'm familiar with "show elections"

The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has been unanimously re-elected to the country’s parliament after every single eligible person in his constituency turned out to vote – with only his name on the ballot paper.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kim-jongun-wins-100-of-the-vote-in-north-korean-elections-9180814.html

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

**meep** — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:22:19 GMT

@boris1gary wrote:
@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
I thought about the saving money aspect too...until I remembered that in one-party, one candidate states they still hold elections, like in North Korea, where their leader was just photographed voting. He had no opposition candidate, but there was still the requirement to vote.
amber, surely as someone who has been there? you are aware that there is in fact more than one party in the DPRK.

What difference does it make if the other 2 parties are under KWD's control?

Re: How could a 1 party system be good?

**meep** — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:36:16 GMT

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
But that would mean a lot less to talk about on Community Spirit

A lot less indeed. Only 'special' people would have access to internet. The main purpose of it of course, would be to spread propaganda.