|
|
|
Champion
 
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 9:15 PM
Posts: 308,
Visits: 1,968
|
|
Just a question.
When a party leader dies, do you a) Hold a party moratorium to decide who the next leader will be? b) hold an internal election to select a new leader? or c) Read the will of the previous leader and declare that the leadership of your party is decided by hereditary title.
Sweet jesus, Would you have wanted to have been ruled by Prime minister Dennis Thatcher? Prime Minister Cherie Blair?.
....Just a thought, if thats the hope of democracy - My Name Is Ernst Von Durkenheim, and I trade herrings for tulips.
But if you really *want* to bug Me and are still trying because I didnt put the damm contact field in properly....Thegamefinisher@yahoo.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 10:19 PM
Posts: 277,
Visits: 1,593
|
|
you forgot d) go on a rampage and destroy anything and everything you can in a 3-5 mile radius.
seems to be quiet a popular choice in some countries...
-----------------------------------------------------------
Rule #30: A little trust goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll go.
PD: Mcavity
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:15 PM
Posts: 259,
Visits: 440
|
|
it depends, what kind of party are we talking about?
____________________________________As the old robot saying goes "does not compute"
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 10:52 PM
Posts: 1,185,
Visits: 3,358
|
|
Coops (12/30/2007)
Just a question.
When a party leader dies, do you a) Hold a party moratorium to decide who the next leader will be? b) hold an internal election to select a new leader? or c) Read the will of the previous leader and declare that the leadership of your party is decided by hereditary title.
Bearing in mind she inherited it herself, it's really not that surprising.
Besides, non-dynastic politics is actually kind of rare - look at the US, where the President is the son of a former President and the frontrunner for the next President is the wife of another former president. France has a history of it too.
People tend to trust names they know. Stupid but true.
PD - Brother Farael of the Ordo Dictum Dominus
EOS - Lord Nasir Suran
6P - System creator (now retired), Andrei Treune of Clan Suner
RL - Will Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:23 PM
Posts: 1,294,
Visits: 1,760
|
|
chalicier (1/2/2008)
Besides, non-dynastic politics is actually kind of rare - look at the US, where the President is the son of a former President and the frontrunner for the next President is the wife of another former president. France has a history of it too.
People tend to trust names they know. Stupid but true.
If you liked the last incumbent and thought they were generally honest and trustworthy, it seems reasonable to imagine that their offspring, being genetically related to them and raised by them are more likely to share similar traits than a complete stranger chosen at random.
I'm not supporting the idea, but I wouldn't use the word stupid to describe it.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 9:15 PM
Posts: 308,
Visits: 1,968
|
|
That was a good point though, but again I think it illustrates the difference here. Hilary and George were first voted on by their party members for selection, and were selected from amongst those. I dont know entirely the situation in france, but our own country has in itself a history of drawing politicians from a very small pool. Those politicians however are voted on by their party as to their eligibility as party leader.
What Im basically saying is that its not really a democratic process if you wake up on Xmas morning and inherit leadership of a political dynasty. There again, I suppose theres a hint in the word dynasty.
But if you really *want* to bug Me and are still trying because I didnt put the damm contact field in properly....Thegamefinisher@yahoo.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:23 PM
Posts: 1,294,
Visits: 1,760
|
|
Coops (1/3/2008)
What Im basically saying is that its not really a democratic process if you wake up on Xmas morning and inherit leadership of a political dynasty. There again, I suppose theres a hint in the word dynasty.
Absolutely. If I woke up tomorrow to find that the labour party had changed it's policy so that the new leader in the event of Mr Brown's departure was to be his eldest male child I would be unimpressed. Almost as unimpressed as I am with the fact that the head of state of the United Kingdom is chosen by some kind of batshit crazy hereditary system... Wikipedia notes that Gordon Brown "is the sixth of the twelve post-war Prime Ministers to be appointed to the role without having won a general election." Fascinating. People who live in glass houses should remember the prohibition on stone throwing perhaps?
Which is not to mock British democracy of which I am inordinately proud and a passionate supporter of. Nor is it to loudly applaud the leader the PPP picked nor how they picked him. But the simple truth is that democracy is never perfect, it is always filled with compromises of one sort and another. But if you let your sense of moral outrage that the democratic process was not "perfect" lead you to throw the baby out with the bathwater then you end up with George Bush calling the leader of your country "General" instead of "President" or "Prime Minister".
I know which I prefer. It's a bad time in Pakistan right now and very worrying. I hope their election produces a leader who strengthen the democratic state there.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:11 PM
Posts: 284,
Visits: 885
|
|
Matt Pennington (1/3/2008)
Absolutely. If I woke up tomorrow to find that the labour party had changed it's policy so that the new leader in the event of Mr Brown's departure was to be his eldest male child I would be unimpressed. Almost as unimpressed as I am with the fact that the head of state of the United Kingdom is chosen by some kind of batshit crazy hereditary system... Wikipedia notes that Gordon Brown "is the sixth of the twelve post-war Prime Ministers to be appointed to the role without having won a general election." Fascinating. People who live in glass houses should remember the prohibition on stone throwing perhaps? Yeah, well that's Wikipedia for you. This is a pet peeve of mine. Brown became Prime Minister in just as democratic a manner as any other PM in the history of the UK - he was invited by the Queen to form a government. He won a general election in both his capacity as MP for Kircaldy and as Chancellor of the Exchequer. His holds his position by virtue of being the leader of the largest parliamentary party, in the same way as every other PM because Britain does not directly elect its Prime Minister (few countries do, of course). Now, you can complain that Brown was elected unopposed to the leadership of the Labour party, or that the Queen has the power to decide who leads the government; but the above criticism is meaningless in UK law (quite apart from anything else, it would mean we were stuck with the same PM until that party lost a general election... in current terms hanging onto Blair until we got Cameron. Do we really want that?).
-- -- -- Eos: Manius Shard, Shard tank commander FnH: Officious Guard no.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |