Monday, December 29. 2008Mobocracy Is Alive And Well In Australia........John Linton
"Democracy is the worst form of government.." (Winston Churchill, speech, House of Commons, November 11, 1947).While I believe I may have expressed the view, more than once I think, that the current 'federal government' is as inept a bunch of ill educated sub-mediocrity to ever pose as such an entity there is and remains the fact that they were, apparently, 'voted' by a majority of the Australian population in to those positions. That may only be a further condemnation of "democracy" as a form of government as also offered by WSC a little later when he said: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter: If you prefer a change of continent, Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying:
So, it's obvious that there are many shortcomings of living in a democracy, and I think that's particularly true at this particular moment in time in Australia, but the fact remains that more than 50% of Australian voters have consigned all Australians to the vagaries, grandstanding inanity and stupidities of the current 'government' for a period of around three years and that's it - you can't change your current 'government' or its stupidities until the next election (which apparently, according to the recent opinion polls, will result in the electorate giving the current fools a second period of three years) These, I assume cynical, views were brought to mind when I read this: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2008/12/26/technology/AP-TEC-Australia-Internet-Filter.html?_r=1 So "censorship" and "removal of our freedoms" and all the other claptrap quoted in that NYT article are just plain juvenile and as equally stupid as the votes that put the idiots implementing the stupidity in a position to do it in the first place if those protestors think that somehow they've been hard done by. Australians have "made their bed and they must lie on it". Get over it - move on. I don't know when life, or at least 'life' for so many foolish people, got so trivial that so many column inches could be devoted to the non-event known as the "Internet filtering trials" but it seems that people who use the internet have a lower IQ than the people who vote in Australia (or perhaps there is a correlation between a Labor voter and low IQs or Labor voters and the inability to either learn from even recent history or to actually read the election 'manifestos' of the party they decide to vote for?). People who use the internet should know, among many other obvious facts, that: 1) The democratically elected Australian government of the day has the confirmed by vote right and obligation to implement its 'mandate'. 2) Attempting to prevent access to any address on the internet is not possible for any internet user of even modest knowledge and 'skill' 3) Attempting to ban access to web sites that are related to child pornography (even if that is impossible) is not something that any sentient entity should even waste one word commenting about 4) The, democratically elected, government of the day in Australia will demonstrate (via opposition scrutiny and the Senate) that it's "ban lists" are created against agreed criteria as authorised by the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED representatives of all Australians (whether they give a damn or not about internet ban lists) So any 'ban list' will be based on what each voter's repesentative agrees to in the democratically elected parliament of the Australian people. The fact that any such ban list will be pointless, for the most part, in that anyone who has elementary skills will not be hindered by it in any case makes the current columnn inches even harder to understand. So, all these 'protestors' must have a paucity of brain cells in that they can't grasp the two essentials involved in this process which, as I understand them are: 1) 50.0001% or more voters in Australia voted for a ban list and it's now past the time to 'protest' against 'the will of the people'. 2) No ban list can possibly work so, irrespective of what transpires, nothing will change. If, and it remains very much an 'if', legislation is passed that requires ISPs to implement some sort of filtering then, because it is a law, then it will be put in place. If you don't like the law, or its end results then you can vote out the current government at the next election (assuming that a prospective alternative government promises to remove the legislation you object to) or you can emigrate. Alternatively you can either do without access to the 'banned sites' or simply log in to a forum/web site that tells you how to circumvent whatever filtering has been put in place. Whatever happens no-one, and I mean absolutely no-one, will be negatively affected by anything that any government may or may not try to do in respect of eliminating access to the internet addresses that currently exist or will exist in the future. PS: I doubt whether anyone will be able to guess where this description of democracy comes from: "DEMOCRACY - A government
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
one won't be able to log "a forum/web site that tells you how to circumvent whatever filtering has been put in place" as it will be on the list...
Comment (1)
If that were to be the case then the end of the world has come and it won't matter.
(I understand you were being comical) Comments (4)
that quote is from the U.S. Army Official Training Manual No. 2000-25 (Between 1928-1932), you were right though, I couldn't guess it, but Google turned it up in 0.26 seconds, I'm guessing that's about how long a Google search will take to find a way around any filters also
Comments (2)
The wonders of Google!
Nevertheless an interesting view of democracy by the US armed forces. Comments (4)
{quote]So "censorship" and "removal of our freedoms" and all the other claptrap quoted in that NYT article are just plain juvenile and as equally stupid as the votes that put the idiots implementing the stupidity in a position to do it in the first place if those protestors think that somehow they've been hard done by. Australians have "made their bed and they must lie on it".
Get over it - move on.[/quote] The problem is that, at the election, all this was "opt in". Now Garret's prophecies have become correct ("don't worry, we'll change once we win the elction"). Same problem as WorkChoices. There was no mention prior to the election, no mandate. Unlike the GST (the other big change) which was announced prior to the election. Comment (1)
True enough - but that's not how it's done in Australia these days.
Krudd has proclaimed himself"president" and that's all there is to it. Give him time and he'll move up from president to.....I don't know......"President For Life? Comments (4)
unfortunately a lot of people I know don't vote for who they want to win, they vote for who they hate the least or whatever is seen as the lesser of two evils
Comments (2)
the best form of government is obviously a dictatorship.
of course this must have the proviso attached, that you are the dictator. any other form of government is a compromise for everyone. "U.S. Army Official Training Manual No. 2000-25 (Between 1928-1932] " has the US army won any conflict since WW2. Comment (1)
I chuckled when i saw the greens at those protests against labor's plan for the internet.
Comment (1)
I always appreciate reading your rants on current topics like this -- that I feel the other way about. The anti-filtering crowd has deployed a lot of crap against this which has little basis in reality, and I think it would be a good idea if we move on and let this whole thing die quietly out the back.
On the other hand, this will cost a reasonable amount of money so the sooner it can be nipped in the bud the better. That's why I protested against this. Comment (1)
There's also the little issue of our crazy preferential voting system. You say that greater than 50% of people voted in KRudd and his 'kronies', which is true, but I wonder just how many of those votes would have been Labor votes if we had a simpler and more logical voting system, without all that preferential rubbish. I always put Liberal and Labor last, since they both suck in my opinion, but ultimately that doesn't matter: whichever one is first on my ballot will get my vote, because of our ridiculous system. (Of course, this doesn't affect your point at all; it's just an aside.)
I love your second Winston Churchill quote. I've had so many discussions with people where my position has been similar (although much less eloquently expressed); I shall have to try to remember that one to bring up next time. And how on Earth can these morons (those of the voting public being polled) possibly want to keep these other morons (Krudd's Kronies) in power!? I just don't get it. I mean, I'm certainly having voter's remorse -- once again, I apologise to all for my extremely bad choice of second-to-last on my ballot paper -- how can Labor possibly be even stronger now, after all of KRudd's ridiculous f**k ups!? I'm thinking Australia's subtitle should change to "The Stupid Country". I certainly don't feel very lucky these days.... So, I agree with most of your post today, John' but, unfortunately, your comment to the effect of "if you don't like it, you can emigrate" is not entirely true. Emigration is quite difficult these days -- at least, to any country one would want to go. I've been trying for years.... Comment (1)
Google:
http://www.georgiaweblog.com/RepVSDemUSARMY.html Comment (1)
|
Calendar
QuicksearchArchivesCategoriesBlog AdministrationExternal PHP Application |