LOL That you think I watch Fox News. You’re living a decade ago. Fox News is full of cucks and globalists.
Of course you elect your doctor because you either go to see him or you go to see someone else. People don’t have that choice with judges.
For what it is worth, I don’t actually want full democracy. Perhaps I misstated that before, so the error is all mine. What I want is the option of exit. When the elite have actively arrayed themselves against the common people, then they have lost the Mandate of Heaven (or whichever term you like). The people have a right to exit at that point and change the arrangements. If they can’t do it peacefully, they will do it violently.
The fact that he got a rise out of you would tend to suggest that the humour was on point.
You don’t elect a doctor, a doctor is a qualified professional who spends years getting an education and training and professionally certified.
Is that point hard to understand or sumfing?
It’s not bad for the first generation of spamibots that come free in a cornflakes box.
You do elect him in the sense that you get to choose. You vote with your feet or your dollar. His “qualification” isn’t handed down from God like stone tablets to Moses or the Koran to Mohammed. It is a piece of paper granted to him that should have a pretty good correspondence with his ability to solve your problem. However, if you do not think that he has solved your problem, or has created another problem, you vote with your feet and his “qualification” isn’t worth diddly squat. With judges, you do not get that choice.
If a tree falls in the forest but no one is around to hear it, does it really make a sound?
If a doctor has no patients, is he really a doctor?
1 Like
Eh…yeah.
The world is full of university graduates who think that the world should beat a path to their door just because they have a piece of paper that says “this person is very clever”. Yet the world doesn’t beat a path to their door. I suspect this is another case of reality being “wrong”. Reality should probably be punished for being so naughty.
1 Like
[quote=“GuyInTaiwan”]You do elect him in the sense that you get to choose. You vote with your feet or your dollar. His “qualification” isn’t handed down from God like stone tablets to Moses or the Koran to Mohammed. It is a piece of paper granted to him that should have a pretty good correspondence with his ability to solve your problem. However, if you do not think that he has solved your problem, or has created another problem, you vote with your feet and his “qualification” isn’t worth diddly squat. With judges, you do not get that choice.
[/quote]
At the risk of stating the obvious, when forum shopping is not possible, you can vote for rejection of the judge’s decision by appealing to a higher court. If the highest court in the realm doesn’t satisfy you, you can appeal to an international authority. (And in Taiwan, you can appeal to the Control Yuan, for whatever it’s worth.)
It’s not perfect. If you have a better solution that doesn’t involve armed revolution, please do explain.
At the risk of stating the obvious, if the elite at one level are corrupt and hate the ordinary people, they’re probably going to be corrupt and hate the ordinary people at a higher level. At some point there needs to be recourse to people completely outside that caste. Isn’t it pretty obvious that people who want less super-national authority are not going to appeal to super-national authorities to deal with people who want super-national authority? Wouldn’t that be self-defeating?
The solution is for the elite not to be corrupt and hate the ordinary people. The next more dramatic step is for the people to peacefully insist upon the elite stepping down. The next more dramatic level is armed revolution. These exist on a spectrum with secondary options following if earlier options don’t work. It’s not a matter of simply wishing the will of ordinary people away (unless you somehow eliminate or replace then, which is also happening). If A does not work, then B will be tried, and so on until a satisfactory solution is found according to ordinary people, even if it is very unsatisfactory for the elite. Things will eventually be sorted out one way or another.
So basically, you just don’t want the judiciary to be able to say anything about how a referendum works (or doesn’t). Is that a fair summary?
You would really hate the Supreme Court of Canada, by the sounds of it.
Obviously, I would like Britain to leave the EU. Maybe all of my reasons for that are completely wrong. Yet I think that I can comment about the meta-politics involved here whilst leaving that aside.
Any group of the elite that screws around with these kinds of things could ultimately be courting disaster. Maybe it won’t happen, maybe it will; it’s not unknown in history though. Again, I am not advocating full-democracy here (I should have made that clearer at the beginning), but I think that any group or individual in a position of power does need to consider the little people, even if only for the sake of stability and safety.
Why have the illusion of voting if it is just an illusion? Either it really does mean something or it doesn’t. Let’s just be really cynical and Machiavellian for a second and assume that it’s all for show. Well, if it’s all for show, then you still have to have the illusion of it being real. The magic trick loses its potency if the magician shows how it’s done; people are going to come away from this thinking that the magician was cheating because his sleight of hand was not very good. I think that they have handled this really badly right from the start. It seems like whatever happens going forwards, everyone is likely to make this much worse. I don’t think that it’s even win-lose for one side now. Another possibility – even more cynical than the last – is that these guys know exactly what they are doing. They know that people are extremely docile and will actually let them get away with this (despite a bit of grumbling here and there). That scenario is really dark and doesn’t lead anywhere good eventually.
The Supreme Court of Canada is from Canada, so it’s to be expected. That country elected Trudeau, after all. Canada seems to be competing with Sweden as to which country can go full retard first. Everybody knows you never go full retard.
1 Like
Ghost of Pierre: (more chuckling, louder this time, but not quite maniacal laughter yet) 
I think I’ll step out now and let the actual Brexit discussion continue. 
They haven’t managed to kill it.
1 Like
Hand over the cash Brits 
In Euros! None of that funny money.
We still look after our own even the red white and blue who ignored or belittled their green heritage in many cases.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/05/irish-passports-soar-in-popularity-amid-brexit
The irony indeed.
Charlie Brooker does a good video.
https://youtu.be/FYPy-4nxJ5M
His trump one is hilarious too!
Interesting that the first thing the EU does is try to stick the UK with a 60 billion euro bill…they must have a good divorce lawyer. I wonder if there’s any collective adult diaper wetting going on in Benidorm right now.
Boring comment ^
The real interesting thing is how May got to decide Brexit meant hard exit and there was hardly a squeak from the parliament or public at large.
Don’t remember people voting to leave the single market. In fact it will cause far more problems than it solves.