Australian democracy is a sham
Shift of flow of capital back to the core plus decoupling of globalised economy into two competing 'cold war' economies should create chaos in the challengers. If it comes to conflict, arsenal of democracy roars into life again. 'Democracy' amongst allies looked pretty anaemic during the 1930s while authoritarianism rose in Europe, Russia, Japan; and yet 'democracy' prevailed.
AndyM wrote:Indo -
"most people are super naive and could never be trusted to make big decisions that affect the country"
You don't reckon people can handle a referendum?
Jeez, just go and live in Singapore already :)
Referendums are fine when about trivial issues like same sex marriage or even indigenous voice to parliament or design of the Australia flag or changing the day of Australia day etc.
But would you really trust the majority of the population to make a decision on more serious issues that could affect things like the economy or future of Australia? (in hindsight even becoming a republic vote was too much, and i guess people voted no purely out of the fear of the unknown, not because they are fans of the Queen or something)
Most people just dont have the capacity or interest to make an educated choice and most would make a decision based on something they saw on social media or TV or what friends of family say.
Maybe now I'm mature enough to go research a topic but in the past no way would i have been, i just would have just done what i thought sounded good or even cool. (hence why i voted for the Greens when younger)
And even now, how do you research a topic properly and get all possible views and pros and cons, i dont trust the government for that info, i dont trust media, the closest place to get that info would i hate to say it but the ABC but even then they can be misleading or not provide the whole picture.
Plus you are going off views of others and even so called experts are often completely wrong just look at the experts predictions of the housing market when Covid hit, Covid was suppose to see huge falls in property prices not huge increases.
Even voting on something like an indigenous voice to parliament the majority of people wont voted based on being educated on the topic knowing all the pros and cons but will vote based on other aspects from what they have heard from someone or read on social media, or social expectations or pressures.
gsco wrote:"We're living in such interesting historical times.
It's possibly a continuation of planet earth slowly unwinding from the jump Europe/UK/USA got over the rest of the world in the industrial revolution, and thus unwinding from colonialism and age of European/UK/USA hegemony.
This jump was due to the capital accumulation from the spoils of war, to rape, pillage, plunder and exploitation, and the complete destruction of the people's of, the Americas courtesy of the slave trade, initiated by the Spanish and Portuguese. It was not due to some kind of Eurocentric superiority in intelligence or political or economic systems, such as democracy...."
yes and no...
dialo, and many others argue, its about innovation and technology, that comes with a higher level of wealth and education, which feed each other...
and possibly the freedom effect of superior forms of government... that encourages, educates, and 'raises all boats' ...creating the 'battle of ideas' and a higher mean...
I would place (misplace) economic terms like 'agglomeration economics' and 'causative causation' in there, that don't just have snowball like economic benefits... ...but could be extended to effects on education and innovation as well, as a diversity of knowledge, cooperation, wisdom and ideas feeds and snowballs educational and innovation outcomes....
"...In the age of European/UK/USA hegemony, democracies of varying degrees and shapes and sizes were the dominant political systems and the majority of peoples was ruled by them either directly or via political and/or neoliberal economic colonialism.
But European/UK/USA hegemony, and indeed the ideas of whole nation-states with (liberal) democratic political systems and of neoliberal capitalism, are only very recent phenomenon (since the 1800s) in the overall bigger picture of the past say 3000 year history of civilisation on this planet..."
pretty hard to go back to that once you have a well educated, connected (digital) society... but geeeeez... certain forces are certainly trying!!!
"...The rest of this time was characterised by the overwhelming proportion of peoples being ruled by various forms of centralised/autocratic/totalitarian/dictatorial, dynastic and/or monarchical systems or indeed empires
What we're seeing in the world now with the rise of China, Russia, and much of the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa, is quite possibly a return to this historical balance and norm of the world being overwhelmingly dominated by:
(i) centralised/totalitarian rule but in the form of unitary nation-states,
(ii) East Asia and India, and..."did that propensity ever actually leave?
"...
(iii) hybrid "socialist/communist/capitalist style", state-dominated economic systems..."
interestingly, the minions of miilionaires (billionaires actually) at nyt, wa-po, etc... were activrly spruiking this hybrid model of china as the superior way forward, for the 'failing' democracies of the west at the start of the pandemic...
until... 'developements', time, ...and a drip feeding of reality... put a stop to that...
but its pretty clear the davos class have fully bought into this idea ...and are (still) having trouble letting it go...
"...It's interesting to note, given their colonial history, that India's economy just surpassed the UK's in size (and India is not really a democracy...).
I'd suggest Russia, China, and a large chunk of Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, want to see an end of European/UK/USA hegemony, influence and "democracy", and are just biding their time as the axis slowly tilts and the balance of power slowly shifts. A lot of countries may very well see China as their saviour..."
absolutely!
throw indonesia in there too... indo, and 'the brics' have all been totally walking both sides of the fence re. ukraine ...a heap of others too... many articles pointing out how not 'united' the 'whole' world actually is re. the 'united' front on ukraine...
which is very telling really, given the brutality of the russian movements
"...Colonialism and the general track record of Europe, UK and USA dominance left a lot of scars that haven't been forgotten."
no doubt
but the alternative?
looks damn scary to me
https://m.
"but the alternative?
looks damn scary to me"
and that's not for us...
for them!
Dalio is required reading/viewing. The Lowy Institute also maintains a really interesting Asia-Pacific Power Index which is similar to how Dalio ranks nations.
That’s a great resource gsco. Thanks
Yep agreed. Thanks.
"Most people just dont have the capacity or interest to make an educated choice and most would make a decision based on something they saw on social media or TV or what friends of family say."
Are you "most people" Indo?
There are a lot of people out there who aren't like you.
gsco wrote:We're living in such interesting historical times.
It's possibly a continuation of planet earth slowly unwinding from the jump Europe/UK/USA got over the rest of the world in the industrial revolution, and thus unwinding from colonialism and age of European/UK/USA hegemony.
This jump was due to the capital accumulation from the spoils of war, to rape, pillage, plunder and exploitation, and the complete destruction of the people's of, the Americas courtesy of the slave trade, initiated by the Spanish and Portuguese. It was not due to some kind of Eurocentric superiority in intelligence or political or economic systems, such as democracy.
I'm not far into the book yet but this guy puts forward that geography was the dominant factor that gave the west the jump on the rest of the world.
https://www.booktopia.com.au/why-the-west-rules-for-now-ian-morris/book/...
an interesting point re. the discussion above about education, development, and the 'success' of nations / empires...
whilst being marrooned (intentionally) on an indonesian island with an educator mate of mine, our discussions would often turn to culture, development, and education... surrounded by a pretty under-developed / under-resourced community, ...drastically so actually... we would often wonder how many potential ground breaking geniuses are never coming to fruition due to very limited educational opportnities in these places...
this would be a huge occurance in indonesia, due to the incredibly unequal opportunities available
and to a lesser extent, in china too
I think this is where our system has done incredibly well, ...whilst there is still large inequalities... that have only grown exponentially in recent times... our system that once strived for equality, has done a good job, and benefitted immensely, from striving for equality and to educate all of its population well
combined with (gross generalisation warning here) cultural differences, around conformity and the dominance of the well being of the group in asian cultures, versus, our intense individualism and (once) encouraged freedom of thought...
I believe asian cultures, especially ones like china and indonesia, with huge inequalities, will be limited in their potential to overtake the world...
luckily for us, its only china that we seem to need to worry about with this little endeavour... but I take some comfort in that their huge inequality, and system of demanding conformity and being overly controlling, and other factors as well, seem that they will hobble their potential somewhat...
that in no way means that we are inherently superior, just that our trajectories and cultures are very different
the chinese are an incredibly smart and hard working people, with an amazing history, but luckily, their culture of emporers and peasants limits their potential i believe
conversely, it now seems our new rulers of the west, almost regret our history of equality and educating the plebs well, and are now doing everything in their power to reverse it, and sowing ignorance is now the order of the day...
luckily for a lowly plebs like me, the internet has made that endeavour quite difficult for them
Thanks for the book recommendation Patrick.
That's a good point you raise Syp.
I think the bigger picture of our times is we're locked into a global competition of "legitimacy" to see which system of rule is more effective: the predominant autocratic type systems led by say China and the newcomer on the block of liberal democratic type systems led by say US/UK.
Both sides genuinely believe theirs is superior and yields better outcomes in terms of things like organisation of society, long-term continuity of rule, social order and stability, living standards and quality of life, happiness and satisfaction, economic growth and development, technological innovation, environment, the arts, even freedom and democratic type participation and decision-making, etc..
The jury seems still to be out...anyone read Fukuyama...?
Patrick wrote:gsco wrote:We're living in such interesting historical times.
It's possibly a continuation of planet earth slowly unwinding from the jump Europe/UK/USA got over the rest of the world in the industrial revolution, and thus unwinding from colonialism and age of European/UK/USA hegemony.
This jump was due to the capital accumulation from the spoils of war, to rape, pillage, plunder and exploitation, and the complete destruction of the people's of, the Americas courtesy of the slave trade, initiated by the Spanish and Portuguese. It was not due to some kind of Eurocentric superiority in intelligence or political or economic systems, such as democracy.
I'm not far into the book yet but this guy puts forward that geography was the dominant factor that gave the west the jump on the rest of the world.
https://www.booktopia.com.au/why-the-west-rules-for-now-ian-morris/book/...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1842.Guns_Germs_and_Steel
I think this book has some interesting and valid reasons/theories why the west is dominant at the moment. Geography being primary reason.
Will chase that Ian Morris book up. Thanks.
All throughout history Europe was a laughing stock, a backwards, undeveloped, primitive backwater compared to the great civilisations of China and India.
Europe and Britain got lucky. There was an easy target right on their doorstep, only a short sail away: the Americas.
Europe actually discovered the Americas by trying to go west to China and Asia. When Europe got to the Americas, they actually thought they were in Asia.
The native peoples of the Americas - such as the Incas and Aztecs - were at a different stage of development than Eurasia, mostly due to the time it took for homo sapiens to travel up around Alaska and down the west coast and across to the east coast. They were also geographically cut off from Eurasia.
Europe/UK was easily able to wipe out these native peoples with disease and war, and then loot, plunder and pillage all their gold, silver and other wealth, use the slave trade with Africa to systematically decimate the remaining natives and environment by converting it into large scale plantations and mines, and get massively rich in the process.
(Of course the same thing happened in Australia.)
They then then used these riches to trade with India, China and Asia, and accumulate capital and investment in their own countries. Europe was also basically perpetually at with with itself, which necessitated technological advance.
Meanwhile, China was experiencing two relatively long term, peaceful, stable and prosperous dynasties of the Ming and Qing.
Due to this lucky jump Europe/UK got on the great civilisations of the time via the industrial revolution, Europe was able to dominate Africa, Asia, India, China, etc by force - by war. We call this colonialism.
What we're seeing now in history is an unwinding of this lucky jump Europe/UK got on the great civilisations and a return to the natural state of affairs: the great civilisations rising back up and Europe/UK/US becoming the backwards laughing stocks again that they alway were.
gsco wrote:What we're seeing now in history is an unwinding of this lucky jump Europe/UK got on the great civilisations and a return to the natural state of affairs: the great civilisations rising back up and Europe/UK/US becoming the backwards laughing stocks again that they alway were.
Agree with you up to this paragraph.
Your thesis is basically the same as that of Jared Diamond's in 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' - as Andy Mac says above - however the message in that book, and that of most people who take a macro view of history, is that humans are 'almost' irrelevant in the timing of progress. It's geography (read: access to resources and arable land) that's allowed some cultures to race ahead as others floundered.
This means it's as futile for Westerners to claim notional superiority as it is for others to assume Westerners are a laughing stock.
Also, while geography is the big player in determining development, culture also plays a part - what social structures are in place? Worth noting both great civilizations you mention - India and China - both have very different systems in place to the past, so the idea of reliving some glorious past owing simply to culture is wrong.
Any thoughts of labelling the Chinese as some kind of master race evaporates like morning mist under blazing sun when you watch them unable to negotiate a gently sloping beach with a meagre shorebreak.
It’s similar to how I imagine alien life would behave when unfamiliar with Earth’s gravity and existing without the assistance of artificial intelligence. All flailing limbs and negative coordination. When one goes over the unbalancing seems to spread like a contagion and before long it’s a scene reminiscent of some prehistoric herd coming to an ignominious end in the Le Brea Tar pits.
As far as any thoughts of a sub continental super species- yeah, nah.Millenia of failing to realise that shitting in your own nest and casting rotten corpses into your drinking water is a really bad health decision precludes that idea.
For sure Stu.
Re this thread, democracy has nothing to do with the historical success of nations. It’s just another means to and form of legitimisation of the power of the rulers.
The ruling wealthy elite start with an unfair advantage and have any system wired; I don’t think they really care which they are operating in.
Will be fascinating to see who and wins out in the current struggle: the historically dominant civilisation of China with its various forms of autocratic, centralised rule or the newcomers of the UK/US colonial empire with its liberal democracies.
Appears to me that Western politicians are being swayed into the authoritarian Chinese model. Between the insidious CCP influence through direct corruption and the sweetheart honeymoon tours they’re taken through China, where western politicians are swept up in the ease of operating without being beholden to electoral considerations, the idea of mild dictatorship is blossoming.
Maybe I’m wrong? Maybe I’m imagining the Prime Minister of Australia allocating himself control over multiple ministries? Maybe it’s a false recollection and state premiers weren’t unilaterally placing entire citizenries under house arrest on a whim?
I think that’s possibly largely right dsds, and partly wrong.
The large scale rollout onto planet earth of nation states with liberal democracies occurred after and indeed because of the ascendency of Europe/UK. Democracy is not a condition for success and power.
Also, it is a well accepted and obvious idea that democracy tends to stifle and limit large scale change, whereas autocratic countries like China can just order change as desired. So this is seen as a disadvantage of democracy, especially at a time when they need to react nimbly to a threatening power.
But the ruling wealthy elite, being naturally conservative, want a stable, predictable system and rules of the game that is largely resistant to change in other to continue to accumulate and cement their wealth and power without having to deal with changing rules of the game not in their favour.. This is why the west is so big on the idea of defending democracy: it’s the current system and it offers stability, conservatism, easy legitimisation of power and rule over the people, resistance to abrupt change…they would prefer not to have to deal with major system change again…
But of course they want this only until faced with a rising, competing system that threatens their wealth and power - then their only alternative is to seek autocratic power and control to protect their wealth. We are seeing this play out in US politics today.
yeh, I can totally see the chinese perspective around legitimacy and stability...
and I can totally see the davos class' attraction and even need for the 'hybrid' model in this little destabilised epoch of time...
however, whilst the beginning of the pandemic may have shown 'evidence' of its superiority... as advocted at the nyt and wa-po... the unfolding of time - and reality - exposed its shortcomings...
be it a historical russia and china, or the modern version, all that control just takes too much energy and resources, stuff that could be put to better use...
it also distinctly lacks accountability, as the stratification creates untouchables well beyond anything that might develope in western systems
and in the modern context, all that control and submission requires a lot of negative energy in a digital landscape
I can see, and almost agree, the plebs need hobbling and controlling in this current little epoch, with environmental problems and over population
however, once the 'energy problem' is overcome - not the ukraine one, but the caveman burning one, that leads to the corruption and dependence that creates ukraine like ones - i envision a george jetson like future where we all enjoy the benefits... with a touch of much needed population management...
naive perhaps... but the miserable version of kings and plebs and returning to dynasties is just way too unpalateable for me...
"Appears to me that Western politicians are being swayed into the authoritarian Chinese model. Between the insidious CCP influence through direct corruption and the sweetheart honeymoon tours they’re taken through China, where western politicians are swept up in the ease of operating without being beholden to electoral considerations, the idea of mild dictatorship is blossoming..."
totally!
plus a bunch of ageing billionaires...
mesmerrised and indebted to the opportunity of live organ shopping in a uygher supermaret
no, the uyghers are not the shop keepers!
The only political system that works is the one that tends to it's population equally and fairly. There are a few around (not as many as there used to be) and their people enjoy a much richer and rewarding lifestyle. Capitalism, communism and dictatorships have never worked and never will work because they all breed a larger poorer lower class and a smaller richer upper class who sure as hell aren't going to share their wealth around unless their political system is set up to make them.
AndyM wrote:"Most people just dont have the capacity or interest to make an educated choice and most would make a decision based on something they saw on social media or TV or what friends of family say."
Are you "most people" Indo?
There are a lot of people out there who aren't like you.
Depends on the topic but as ive noted half the problem is how do you really educate yourself comprehensively when we can no longer trust governments, media or even education systems?
Id like to think maybe I'm closer to a certain point where i acknowledge that i really dont fully understand every aspect of many topic's but understand its way more complex than i once thought.
I think immigration is a good example of this, i use to think its was all pretty black and white and very pro low immigration, but now i understand that its way more complex than that, obviously birth rates are a big factor, general age of population etc and there is so many things to take into account that are going to have all kinds of effects, on economy, jobs, viability of some business, housing, building industry, tax income, tax spending, things like pensions etc its such a juggling act, and i dont have the knowledge or understanding to throw a figure out there that our immigration rate should be.
Yeah of course there is always people that believe they know best, often is not just everyday people but, highly educated quite intelligent people that can either never admit they dont know or just believe they know best, they are perhaps the worse kind.
So yeah i dont trust the majority of the population to make decisions on real important issues especially ones that could affect the economy.
“Yeah of course there is always people that believe they know best, often is not just everyday people but, highly educated quite intelligent people that can either never admit they dont know or just believe they know best, they are perhaps the worse kind. “ ……… are you talking about Scott Morriscum ?
garyg1412 wrote:The only political system that works is the one that tends to it's population equally and fairly. There are a few around (not as many as there used to be) and their people enjoy a much richer and rewarding lifestyle. Capitalism, communism and dictatorships have never worked and never will work because they all breed a larger poorer lower class and a smaller richer upper class who sure as hell aren't going to share their wealth around unless their political system is set up to make them.
Can you elaborate on these systems you think are better that treat all equally or fairly and have provided people a richer more rewarding lifestyle?
Supafreak wrote:“Yeah of course there is always people that believe they know best, often is not just everyday people but, highly educated quite intelligent people that can either never admit they dont know or just believe they know best, they are perhaps the worse kind. “ ……… are you talking about Scott Morriscum ?
Yes politicians can be very stupid, Biden or Albo are good examples of people that clearly lack something up top and crumble under pressure especially when journalist ask questions.
Ok to keep you happy i will use an LNP prime minister as an example.
Tony Abbott is extremely well educated he even went to Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, but also thought he could prevent refugees coming to Australia by boat by trying to buy leaky fishing boats, you and me have never gone to Oxford be with our experience in Indo we know how ridiculous that idea was.
Clearly he didn't have an advisor with an understanding of Indonesia.
Indo - "how do you really educate yourself comprehensively when we can no longer trust governments, media or even education systems?"
This is largely where the dummies are easily led and disappear up their own arses.
Meanwhile, those that can chew gum and walk at the same time will be able to do enough research or maybe draw on their own life experiences to get themselves through something like a referendum.
Also - "yeah i dont trust the majority of the population to make decisions on real important issues especially ones that could affect the economy."
So it seems like you put the economy way up high as an ultimate priority.
I dare say that there are a very large number of people whom you would see as having no idea about the economy when in fact they see the economy as being less important than, say, a (somewhat) intact environment and would make decisions accordingly.
Just a thought.
“ Yes politicians can be very stupid “
. “ Leader of the leftovers “ comedy gold again from Jim Chalmers .Jim Chalmers "who could possibly oppose a tax cut to make electric vehicles cheaper?"
— Squizz (@SquizzSTK) September 7, 2022
"The Leader of the Leftovers"#auspol pic.twitter.com/4SOADtE1PY
Supafreak wrote:“ Yes politicians can be very stupid “ https://twitter.com/squizzstk/status/1567386251841654786?s=21&t=_5Xz_yKm.... “ Leader of the leftovers “ comedy gold again from Jim Chalmers .
Bubble of bubbling incompetence... Haha nail on head ..
Classic....
Well Albo has just rejected the wishes of majority of Australians by recommitting us to the Big Australia model.
The Big Australia model is destructive of every quantifiable standard of living and measure of success as a nation and a community. The Big Australia model- minimum starting base of an extra 1.000.000 immigrants every five years - will see wages plummet, access to health and welfare severely curtailed, water security utterly toileted , congestion and human traffick skyrocketed, competition for employment turbocharged.
Big Australia model takes the concept of sustainability and environmental protection and boots it so hard in the goolies that the idea of protecting our planet will taste like testicles forever more. Any ambition towards emissions reductions is likewise a hearty joke that Albo can’t quite understand.
Albo sold us all out. We replaced a lying sociopath Scomo with an empty chair spineless eunuch and the difference in outcome is negligible at best. The environment is still rooted. Australians wil still be much, much worse off than if we’d voted in an inanimate object.
The duopoly major parties collude to ignore the issues essential to maintaining a liveable nation in preference to indulging the whims of the plutocracy.
Without putting too fine or hyperbolic a point on it….democratic representation in Australia is dead and buried. We get a choice between Coke and Pepsi. We decide which set of useless cnts will ignore the people.