|
Matthew The wider
you spread the power of removal the more difficult you make it to have a
corrupt system – the price maybe that you get a sub-optimal one. I would say
given current history that the Anglo-Saxon liberal democracy model appears to
have won out over despotism, monarchy and communism (but I may just be too
short-term in my view). With sufficient education and surplus resources, just
possibly, communism may have a chance. Alex -----Original
Message----- Alex, I agree
that it's easy to just criticise politicians, but I don't think that anyone's
trying to be cynical for its own sake. I think that what needs questioning in
general are the institutions and the system of government. We don't need
to make personal attacks on individual politicians to do that. On the other
hand I completely accept that my 'meritocracy' is open to corruption. I am
taking inspiration from businesses (always dangerous I know), who seem able to
promote from the inside and outside without necessarily giving jobs to their
friends. Benn's five
questions seem to be important ones to ask, although I take a bit of issue with
the fifth. When it is asked "how do we get rid of you?" who is the
"we?" This goes back to Ed's first questions about the value of
democracy. Sure, leaders should be removable and accountable, but should they
be removable by the people at large and accountable to the people? Matthew |