The pre-election post...

[tcpip]

OK, here's a pitch to the few of you out there who haven't made up their mind on how they're voting on Saturday. I'm not going to suggest who you vote for, but rather I will suggest who you shouldn't vote for.

Democracy is a system of government which was not won easily. People - invariably men - of power and property, fought tooth and nail to ensure that we "common folk" were not allowed to directly influence government. On the other side, rationalists argued that any person, when provided the opportunity to make an informed decision, is capable of correctly choosing their representative. Supported by the "intellectuals" of the day, and a bit of industrial muscle from the labour movement, we won that battle - and it wasn't that long ago.

However, when that principle of making informed decisions is taken away, you may as well not have elections at all. When there is a cynical excersise of mass deception in order to gain power, there is no democracy, merely a campaign of the biggest lie.

I ask you then, before you vote, to read the following. Yes, it's from an ALP site. But I've checked each quote carefully and they are accurate.

http://www.alp.org.au/features/lies.php

A vote for John Howard is, effectively, a license to lie. It is a vote that permits someone to deceive you. Don't do it.

(And cut-and-paste and forward this on to all who haven't made up their mind).

Via adricongirl and erudito - and from one of the more sensible people whom I've discussed such matters with, Brian Palmer's
political test (for this election)..

My results are: One Nation: 22%; National Party: 17%; Liberal Party: 31%; Labor Party: 77%; Democrats: 95%; Greens: 86%. It's probably how I'd vote as well...

Also from adricongirl (who is obviously paying attention to this election)... According to Family First, followers must "pull down Satan's strongholds" which includes mosques, Freemasons' temples, brothels and bottle shops. Further, they've had to discipline a campaign volunteer who claimed that "lesbians are witches and should be burned to death". They have also decided that the lesbians (they do have a thing about them, don't they?) won't receive preferences.

They've also decided to propose an
annual fee on all Internet users to block at a server level things they find objectionable. On a related matter, Manhunt has been banned. *grumble*

Was very impressed by Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11, both of which I finally got around to seeing with caseopaya last Friday. Mike Moore does go straight to the source, and I like that. He's also been receiving some mail from
US troops in Iraq.

In other news, I fixed a very recalcitrant DHCP/ICS problem on Monday along with zone file problems for the website and email and on Wednesday my second meeting with DEWR representatives went really well. My business plan is considered "extremely viable". w00t! On Friday I hand it in..

Comments

[reynardo.livejournal.com]

One Nation%3ubjeubjeubjeubjeubjeubjeubjeubje5%
Liberal Party: 21%
Labor Party: 60%
Democrats: 84%
Greens: 84%

Scary - but which is scarier - that I'm equal on Democrats/Greens or that I put One Nation before the Nationals and Liberals?

[severina-242.livejournal.com]

The Liberal candidate was at my station this morning doing a slimy sort of meet and greet. Not many people were interested. Pity you weren't there.... I merely muttered 'wanker' as I passed but I'm sure you would have had several questions for him.

[jazzyjay.livejournal.com]

They're against bottle shops and lesbians? W-why that's everything I'm for!

[caseopaya.livejournal.com]

Avoiding the political topic for the moment, congratulations on the business plan!

BTW I think the film of "Roger and Me" is going to be screening soon too - can't remember where I read that though...

[greg.livejournal.com]

My comment isn't specificaly on point but it does pertain to Australia..

As my #1 Australian friend on my journal, I am writing to see if you have any information for me on Melbourne/Victoria area. I've yet to make the announcement on my journal yet but an opportunity has come up for me to relocate down to Australia for business around the new year and I'm starting to look around to try to gather some information.

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

I got something similar (Greens marginally ahead of Democrats). My reasons for favouring Greens over Dems are based less on their philosophies than on my faith in their ability to do something about those philosophies.

[feedthefetish.livejournal.com]

Something I do every election time, instead of shoving my political opinions down other people's throats, is ask people to explain what the Australian levels of government are. Then if they can answer that I ask them how they are made up. Following that filter, or the first one, I ask them which level of government is responsible for what function. If we get further in the conversation I'll sometimes ask other questions like if they know the difference between a referendum and an election, or, the varying differences in the authority of State Govenors versus the Govenor General. I might then ask about preferential vote distribution and how it differs from a 'first past them post' system in a democracy. I'm sure you get the point and the line the questions take. I try to talk to people of all ages and backgrounds, try not to be offensive (which is sometimes hard for me), I am never interested in how someone votes when I ask them about these things and I try to reinforce that I'm taking the subjective component out of things and just want some objective answers.

What was super interesting about this election time for me is that most the people I talked to had no clue as to what the difference was between local, state and federal government and the few that did couldn't tell me how they were made up and why. Most of them had little to no idea as to which level of government was responsible for what functions or what the parties on their ballot paper in their electorate stood for. Most of people who volunteered who they vote for (something I never ask anyone about btw) they used the leader of the party (eg: 'Howard', 'Latham', 'Brown', etc) as the identifier. I'd then point out that we don't have presidential style elections and that unless they are enrolled to vote in seat of the elected leader of the party that they were indeed voting for a 'party' and a candidate elected by that party in their electorate - not the leader of that party. Very few people confidently said "I know that" when I pointed it out to them. Most people identified with the Prime Minister being the most powerful person in the country not even realising that laws are passed by the Senate and that we have a Governor General who has the power to sack the PM.

I do this little exercise to shield myself from the emotions (the subjective) of the election as being something I should celebrate or get disappointed about because of all the people who voted not every single one of them actually knew objectively what they were doing or what framework (ie. our constitution) they were doing it in. Not their fault and something I can't blame them for, so they have an opinion and that's what they use to influence their vote. In a democracy, everyone's opinion is valuable and can not be judged as right or wrong - all you can do in a democracy is count it and give everyone equal respect for their opinion. The good ol' "I might not agree with what you have to say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" stands firm with me, otherwise democracy itself fails.

My opinion on how to improve one of the soundest democracies in the world (ie: the Australian one) is that we should all have to sit an exam, or attend classes, on the basic construction of our government (specified in the constitution) before we're put on the electoral role. We should also get a government publication regularly (not something we have to go to find) that spells out who is responsible for what, and a short form report on where the money that is collected in taxes is *actually* distributed.

That's my take on the election (and every other election for that matter). As a suggestion, try asking one new person each day about how our democracy is structured and I think you'll find the collective result as super interesting as I do.