'puter democracy

[grinner]

Just off the top of my head.

Paul Keating left school at fifteen to become a clerk at the NSW electricity commission.
Rob Mitchell was a mechanic, and RACV man.
Kate Lundy was a construction worker.
Dick Adams was a meat worker, the most entertaining man in Tasmania and for a time was the fastest milkman in Lyons....
Peter Garrett was in a rock band.
Mike Kelly was a soldier for twenty years.

There's teachers as well. The ALP might be chockas with Union types, but they are mostly politicized tradies.

Even the Libs have people that have had real jobs. Not sure about the Nats, the old joke is farmers send the kids they don't trust to run the farm to Parliament.

eric, you old true believer you

thats about 6 names out of maybe 1000 politicians who have served since keating was around.

first lot to go would be the senate. we dont have a senate in qld. might have even saved us a bit of money

here's a few words of wisdom from a grass roots organization noel pearson is a member of


For more than a century, political parties of both Right and Left have presided over a steady shift in power away from individual citizens towards large corporate and state institutions. In the process, both Left and Right have become defenders of these powerful corporate, institutional and provider interests at the expense of relatively powerless individuals and families.

In government, Left and Right have administered legislative and regulatory regimes that favour large corporations over small business; providers over consumers; professionalised and incorporated entities over informal associations; funded quangos over independent self-help governance; and impersonal litigation-prone rules and regulations over personal and communal responsibility. As the initiators and administrators of these regimes, the two major political machines (Labor and Liberal) have become instruments through which powerful corporate, institutional and provider interests uphold and preserve their dominance over society.



Over the course of this century-long shift in power away from individual citizens to large institutions, the two major political parties in Australia have ceased to be mass participation civic organisations. The membership of both Labor and Liberal parties is in sharp decline - the membership of the Liberal Party, in particular, is in free fall. In place of mass civic participation, both parties have developed a managerial culture in which an ever diminishing number of professional operatives use a combination of spin, media advertising, and the donations of corporate interest groups (increasingly property developers, gaming, alcohol and tobacco companies) to sway electoral opinion as required every three years in what they now call the 'electoral cycle'.

A professional political class, comprising operatives in both machines, now acts like every other specialist professional group, erecting barriers to entry by non-specialists and non-professionals, and widening the gap between itself and the general citizenry. Membership of parliament is now largely restricted to union officials, political staffers and labour lawyers on the ALP side, and political staffers and commercial lawyers on the Liberal side. Both machines collaborated in 1923 to make voting compulsory to ensure that even the most disillusioned voters are still required to turn out and vote against the machine they dislike the most.

The result is that political power in Australia has become concentrated in the two major political machines in ways that would be unimaginable to the writers of the Commonwealth Constitution and the architects of the Westminster system of government. Parliament is no longer a forum for public decision-making it has become simply a venue for the ruling political machine to announce its activities, and a venue for the opposing political machine to declare its opposition until the next election comes around.


and heres a link from tony fitzgerald who is a very respected qld lawyer and ran the fitzgerald enquiry


http://www.partnerships.org.au/library/ ... gerald.htm





when the grass roots and the QC"s are saying similar things i think we have a problem.

and pollies shouldnt be able to lob straight into a career as lobbyists after they retire...very naughty

[liam8227]

Just off the top of my head.

Paul Keating left school at fifteen to become a clerk at the NSW electricity commission.
Rob Mitchell was a mechanic, and RACV man.
Kate Lundy was a construction worker.
Dick Adams was a meat worker, the most entertaining man in Tasmania and for a time was the fastest milkman in Lyons....
Peter Garrett was in a rock band.
Mike Kelly was a soldier for twenty years.

There's teachers as well. The ALP might be chockas with Union types, but they are mostly politicized tradies.

Even the Libs have people that have had real jobs. Not sure about the Nats, the old joke is farmers send the kids they don't trust to run the farm to Parliament.

Yes there are still many who come from different backgrounds but I think you'll find that changing over the next 10-20 years as this crop retire and the next lot come through. I'm not professing to be an expert on politics but I heard a good show on ABC radio a little while ago discussing this very topic. The concensus was that young people see politics as a career now and not so much of a tool to implement their ideological views. You therefore get large numbers of young people going straight out of uni and into the political parties. They hone their political skills as a party hack for a while before rising up to preselection and parliament if they're lucky.

You can already see that there very few real ideological differences between the parties any more which means they have to resort to populist policies and games of "well, we're not as bad as them". This will only get worse.

I think you might see that idea fall away for a while at least. The demise of Labor in Qld has confirmed for many people (in the party and out) that the system needs to change. The LNP will probably rule up here for a couple of terms at least. However it will take a fair while to unplug a lot of the inefficiencies in the bureaucracy. Federally changes are afoot as well. Whether you agree with Julia or not her Carbon Tax deal has almost certainly put Abbot in the chair as the next PM. This should cause Labor to also reassess in order to get back into power. These things are cyclical. Politics has always been a career for some and a calling for others. At least for the foreseeable future things are going to be changing within the labor party.

On topic, I don't think computer democracy is a good idea. Putting the major decisions into the hands of the people is bound to fail. Self interest rules at the best of times. Give people the ability to have a direct say in major issues and there will be a lot less coherent governance.

[Barrabundy]

I don't think computer democracy is a good idea. Putting the major decisions into the hands of the people is bound to fail. Self interest rules at the best of times.

Just like putting a petition in front of someone, any man and his dog (except me!) will sign one because it makes them feel like they're doing something but it requires no effort. Imagine a "reduce your taxes" button, everyone would be pushing it!

[liam8227]

I don't think computer democracy is a good idea. Putting the major decisions into the hands of the people is bound to fail. Self interest rules at the best of times.

Just like putting a petition in front of someone, any man and his dog (except me!) will sign one because it makes them feel like they're doing something but it requires no effort. Imagine a "reduce your taxes" button, everyone would be pushing it!

Agree whole heartedly. I never sign any petitions unless I actually believe it. I spent half my day shepherding the usual rent a crowd through the city. Self interest rules. Whether its land rights/ gay marriage/ smutty TV or pools for the disabled almost everyone banging on about the issue does so for there own reasons. Altruism is in my opinion a pretty rare thing. That said people need to be involved in the political process. The vast majority of Aussies are effectively gagged. The noisy fringe (both left and right) get far more airplay than the average citizen. True democracy does not really work. The competing interests of the citizenry effectively block any action or like minded individuals group together.

The very unfortunate thing about our political landscape is how disillusioned the vast majority of us are. I am pretty sure that most people reading this are not satisfied with the current state of politics in Canberra. In Qld we have been stuck with duds since Goss was kicked out.

Pete you do make an interesting point about retired Generals. In our military system Officers lead the troops but NCOs fight the battles so to speak. Both my older brother and sister in law are Army Officers. The difference in training and culture between the two streams is quite profound. The levels of responsibility are also vastly different. At the heart of it though all soldiers are taught to accept responsibility, show initiative, take charge of a situation. Officers by virtue of rank are expected to show these traits, to be effective administrators, to manage the welfare of their troops and a whole host of other little things.

These qualities are often lacking in the private sector. I see most of the rank within my own service as managers- not leaders. There is a vast difference between the two. It is an unfortunate aspect of politics that lawyers are attracted to that arena of debate (apologies to the lawyers reading this). Lawyers make great arguments but do not develop leadership skills through there profession. One has to look at Gillards performance over her term as PM. She is no doubt a good lawyer, able to speak well and at length on a topic. Argues well in parliament. Presents well to the public. But she does not provide a continuity of character (indeed I would argue her character is pretty unknown, there is spin, there is illusions to it but to put your finger on what makes her tick is very hard). She also fails to inspire the electorate with her policies- her arguments are usually pretty good but they fail to sway me. I would suggest that the reason she has such a lacklustre approval rating is because at the heart of it Julia does not know how to lead an office let alone a country. Committees, social movements, legal practice all sharpen the argument. They do not provide a person with the necessary skills to inspire people to follow them.

A junior officer straight out of Duntroon can (and has been expected many times in our history) be placed in the situation where after around 2 years of training they are expected to lead 30 men into a violent confrontation where some of them may be killed. Personal courage, integrity, example, self sacrifice. These things (as well as a culture and martial code) motivate men into combat. Every soldier trains with the understanding that war fighting is the result. Lawyers argue over points of law, semantics, they use fabrications, tricks and shadings of the truth to win in court. Court is less about justice than who has the better argument (or QC).

What it comes down to is that military service is not valued in our political system. The US places a lot of emphasis on whether or not a politician has served his country. Regardless of how ethical, successful or intelligent a person is if they have not served in the military it is very likely that they have an under developed sense of the group at the expense of ones self. Militaries develop this sense of the group welfare above the individual. They value decision makers. Not people who can string together pretty lines of prose.

[salticrak]

You say that the minority/special interest voices have a louder voice under this system,this is undoubtedly true,because of the nature of how government is now formed.I think that puter democracy would at least level the demands of any particular interest group because of the mass of popular votes.This may lead to a centrist approach of governance that could be moderated by say a committee of respected individuals whose decisions would be transparent and above outside influence,almost like a tribunal of sorts.I mean we have had at least a century to grasp what we in the west would judge as fair and equitable for the populace although there are some exceptions.

[grinner]

liam,

thats an extraordinarily well thought out piece you've written.

i'm going to print that out.

the lawyer adverserial approach seems counter to good outcomes.

it cant make logical sense that on many many topics there should not be consensus.

ive often thought it would be smart politics to come out and start doing 2 things

1 admit the other side is right and congratulate them
2 admit youve made a mistake and change your mind.

i doubt the troops would mind an officer who said "this isnt working boys, lets sit down and think up a new strategy. ' this would appear to be political suicide in our current environemt


interesting topic salti thank you

[FazerPete]

Very well put Liam.

You're absolutely right about the culture of managers and not leaders. I don't know if anybody read the Peter Principle but it was a reasonably famous study of incompetence that still holds as true today as when it was written in 1971. The main principle is that anyone in an heirarchical organisation will rise to reach their level of incompetence. Basically, you keep getting promoted until you reach a point where you aren't competent at that level and don't get promoted again and are stuck in a job that you aren't good at. Eventually everyone in the organisation is incompetent at the job they are doing.

One of the things that the book discussed was the concept of input and output where output is anything that generates revenue or contributes to the organisations objectives and input was all the adminstrative crap that goes on around it. Both are necessary but I think that managers are focused on input and leaders are focused on output.

Sorry it's a bit off topic but it's a great read if you're into that sort of thing.

[Barrabundy]

Some good material for me to get stuck into tonight!