Democracy under threat

Whitewave I like that phrase 'direction of travel'. If a party completely travels in the opposite direction they should be out.

Elegran

love0c

Monica I disagree. A lie is a lie. If a politician says one thing and does another then they did lie in the first place. The lie stands whatever way you vote.

Lying is knowing that the truth is entirely different from what you are saying, but saying it anyway. Changing your plans in the light of further information or research does not make you a liar. Have you never told your child that there would be some treat or other, then found it would be impossible to do it as you had planned - they would be very upset, and you would be blamed for disappointing them, but you were not telling lies.

If the politicians say they intend to do something and then genuinely find it impossible once they have gone into it more deeply, then they have not lied, they have been a bit quick in stating the intention before they have done all the planning and the costing, but it wasn't a lie when they said it. The information may not have been available when they declared "If I was in charge, I would . . " - particularly detailed financial info, which a previous financial department may have been reluctant to totally reveal to a possible successor until they had to.

This.

And of course major events come along which make previous intentions either not possible or only deliverable to a limited extent.

Politicians like us all may also say something - for example saying 4 years ago "we would or wouldn't do this", given the circumstances of that time say 2020/2021

By the time an election comes/manifesto drawn up, 2 or 3 years later, 2024, the situation has changed so much the original intention is not possible. This is not a "lie". This happens in all areas of life. Good politicians do their best, and its intention that matters.

Casdon You have complexity lost me there with your post?

I think that perhaps we should treat manifestos as “direction of travel” rather than a tablet of stone.

Our involvement begins and ends with the vote.

love0c

Casdon Yes i know that. Labour lied to get voted in. They knew they were lying. Their intent is evident!

Why did you not say what you actually meant then, instead of making a statement that wasn’t true? It’s always better to be clear what you’re talking about.

Growstuff You are missing the point. It is because we have allowed party's to continually lie to us that they do. Are you saying then we can doing nothing about it? We just have to allow them to continue lying? They all need pulling up. Yes it is difficult but things have to change.

I’m honest with myself, I know what I can achieve and I know what others around me can achieve. There are always unexpected snags so you allow extra provision, over time it all gets done. That exactly what successful business do they deliver what they promise.

Politicians, to win votes they promise too much, too soon, either they don’t have the resources or some snag delays the work. Hence most polititians end ups failures because they promise too much

love0c

Whitewave It might if party's were held accountable. if we continually allow them to lie, then they will continue to do so. It is called having a deterrent.

How would you know if an alternative could do any better? Would you kick a new government out when it showed it couldn't deliver either?

Whitewave I understand what you are saying. However, if a party is allowed to lie and get away with it, which they have been allowed to for years. This is why we are in the state we are. Things have to change. It will be difficult but that is no reason not to. As the saying 'nip it in the bud'. We have never 'nipped'. We now need to cut back!

love0c

Whitewave It might if party's were held accountable. if we continually allow them to lie, then they will continue to do so. It is called having a deterrent.

Well, how would you deal with a promise made in the manifesto - say to cut military spending. And then, we were threatened by a foreign power?

Or to increase spending in a certain area, and then world markets meant that the chancellor faced a rise in borrowing costs that in effect cut her budget?

Whitewave It might if party's were held accountable. if we continually allow them to lie, then they will continue to do so. It is called having a deterrent.

Incidentally, I was playing devil's advocate.

love0c

Keeping quiet I agree. I think if a party breaks their manifesto they should resign. That goes for whichever party is in. Any party can say anything to get voted in and they do!

Events dear boy, events.

That would never work.

love0c

Growstuff Hence, why I say they should be held accountable.

How?

Growstuff Hence, why I say they should be held accountable.

If all politicians lie, what's the point of democracy? Every so often we (the plebs) are given a chance to choose how we run our society, but how can we decide if we're essentially taking pot luck because nobody tells the truth? Do we decide because we like somebody's trouser suit or smile? Why even bother with democracy? Why not just let the strongest climb to the top and rule as we were ruled in the Middle Ages?

Surely we can come up with something better than that!

Keeping quiet I agree. I think if a party breaks their manifesto they should resign. That goes for whichever party is in. Any party can say anything to get voted in and they do!

love0c

Monica I disagree. A lie is a lie. If a politician says one thing and does another then they did lie in the first place. The lie stands whatever way you vote.

Lying is knowing that the truth is entirely different from what you are saying, but saying it anyway. Changing your plans in the light of further information or research does not make you a liar. Have you never told your child that there would be some treat or other, then found it would be impossible to do it as you had planned - they would be very upset, and you would be blamed for disappointing them, but you were not telling lies.

If the politicians say they intend to do something and then genuinely find it impossible once they have gone into it more deeply, then they have not lied, they have been a bit quick in stating the intention before they have done all the planning and the costing, but it wasn't a lie when they said it. The information may not have been available when they declared "If I was in charge, I would . . " - particularly detailed financial info, which a previous financial department may have been reluctant to totally reveal to a possible successor until they had to.

love0c

Casdon Yes i know that. Labour lied to get voted in. They knew they were lying. Their intent is evident!

Politicians shouldn't lie but human beings do although they shouldn't.

Maybe AI politicians are the way forward.

I don't get how Starmer can possibly be a bigger lier than Johnson, but it was seen as a charming trait in him.

People need to start being more honest with themselves, but that isn't going to happen either.

Casdon Yes i know that. Labour lied to get voted in. They knew they were lying. Their intent is evident!

A lie is a deliberate intention to mislead love0c. If somebody says one thing and does another it is not always a lie, because circumstances, and people, change. It’s the intent that is the relevant factor.

Galaxy

The left have been controlling speech for years, as I said ask any feminist. I am afraid the last few years have taught me that left automatically equals good and right equals bad is a demonstration of the lack of the critical thinking you are talking about.

You could say the same for automatically believing that right automatically equals law and order and universal financial success and left automatically equals communistic mediocrity and sheep-like dependence on welfare handouts. Neither image would be correct. The truth is somewhere halfway between the two.

Aristocracy, plutocracy, meritocracy, democracy, just about all of the #ocracies, are all attempts to get a nation composed of people of many varied backgrounds, skills and attitudes to live in close proximity without constant exploitation by the powerful of the vulnerable, or physical and virtual bloodshed.

It was much simpler when we lived as family groups well spaced out from each other in a sparsely populated landscape, and only came up against the Others if we were foraging far from home, or if they had used up all the resources around their encampment and were looking for somewhere new to live. Differences within a group were settled in-house, and if you didn't like the result, you could walk out and set up home elsewhere in the ample empty wilderness that surrounded you, with no-one to disagree with you.

You can't do that any more. Empty wilderness is in short supply, even Antartica and Everest are littered with the evidence of human life (or death in the case of Everest). There are always others around, with their own opinions and ideals to push, or their own power and wealth to pursue.

Monica I disagree. A lie is a lie. If a politician says one thing and does another then they did lie in the first place. The lie stands whatever way you vote.

All democracy is based on lies. Anything any politician says that does not agree with the political preferences of the individual voter is a lie - at least in the mind of that person.

You only need to read any GN political thread to learn that.

What's the excuse for Left wing groups banning books , I wonder.

There’s not much to choose between right and left at the extremes. Both can be authoritarian, and it is this, rather than economic philosophy, that encourages the control of education and ideas.