How could a 1 party system be good?

[freakiness]

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?

[freshwater-2]

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.

[freddie*rooster]

---

@lakeland27 wrote:

we could all end up despising the same person/persons  

---

Yes and we could give Nero some Kudo's

[boris1gary]

---

@**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-electio...

---

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

[monman12]

"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

[boris1gary]

---

@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.

[poddster]

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

OMG how lucky are we ?

[gkam2]

---

@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-electio...

---

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/

---

[march470]

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-electio...

---

---

---

[**meep**]

---

@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?

[**meep**]

---

@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.