Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
You can elaborate if you want but a straight yes or no answer is all I require.
certain people within that government - not really
I trust them not to suddenly start a nuclear war.
I don't trust them to deliver on their environmental/healthcare/education policies.
I do not expect them to always agree with what I personally think is right.
I trust that Brown & co aren't a bunch of evil megalomaniacs. I don't trust that they don't always forsake their political principles for personal gain.
on the detention thread ho_fo stated the opinion that people trust the government far too much these days whereas I've never met anyone who implicitly trusts the government and believe pretty much everyone to be somewhat cynical about how much you can trust them.
a song by talking heads. a great song.
the clues all the title
why should I?
They are under no obligation to tell me the truth
, so, since they are engaged in a constant propoganda war with the opposition
(no matter who is in power)(....because that is the sort of democracy you have)
It will not serve their needs to tell the truth to me.
(applies to all governments that I have experianced )
they arn't under any obligation to tell you the truth, so why would you imagine they would tell you the truth?
why would you assume that they are doing things that will benefit you in the long run, their aim, is to maintain the current system of administration....THAT is their PRIME DIRECTIVE, it shouldnt be, in my opinion, but that is what it amounts to, in this they actually will not be successful for much longer (regretably I must add, as I do not wish to happen, what will happen)
show him how to rig the question to get the result that he needs
but think your making too many assumptions.
I mean obviously implementing the 42 days act means accepting that it takes 42 days to get evidence in some cases and means trusting the government not to mis-use these powers but I don't think trusting the government not to mis-use these powers (especially given no-one's used 28 days so far so clearly that can't be being misused) necessarily tranlsates as havng too much trust in the government in general.
If i consider an act approved of by 51% to be imoral then I would be immoral to support it, and, depending upon the act/issue in question, it might be immoral to abide by it.
Following democratic decisions does not confer morality or even 'correctness' or 'best option', it whould be dependant on the democratic process to ensure that all those taking part in the voting are as informed knowledgable and mentally agile and free from duress regarding the issue as possible.
Our country has many factors that work against the production of able knowledgable voters only voting on that which they know about.
Not the least the idea of voting for a grouping of varying sundry ideas (lib/lab/con) meaning that very little oif the voting choice might be directly linked to a particular issue, yet because of voting for another thing, a mandate is assumed for whatever....its pisspoor and not taken seriously by britain......yet people like me are prefered as targets 'as the enemy of democracy', when all i say is ,that it needs to improve loads
This reminds me of the twunt with a camera approaching people in parliament square this weekend past. Sample question: "On a scale of 1-10, how much democracy would you say Britain has".
be more specific
in parliament politics, so I know there are a lot of people there who really do care about issues and want to make a positive difference.
I don't believe anyone in government wants to ruin the world or anything.
However, one thing is clear to me. The single most important thing to the Labour party is staying in power. And the single most important thing to the Conservative party is obtaining power. And essentially, everything else comes after that. And for that reason, I find it more or less impossible to trust any of them to do what they consider right, and instead to put what they think people want to hear/what will damage their reputation least first. There's probably a big correlation between the two, but it's not absolute.
so a firm no is my reply.