|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 9:39:21 GMT -5
And then the Commonwealth ceases to recognize her authority. We live in the modern world, not 1600. Also, if a Monarch is nuts, they can be forced to step aside while someone acts as their proxy.
Honestly, I think that the monarchy is outdated and useless, but it's not like Canada's government is sitting atop a house of cards. The queen has zero impact on my day-to-day life.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 9:30:10 GMT -5
Ah, legalism.
The Governor General is not an all-powerful god. If he or she were to dick around, a new GG would be appointed. Yes, the Queen's authority is still recognized in Canada, technically allowing her to dick around in certain ways, but in practice, she's not going to risk pissing off the Commonwealth and the world just for shits and giggles, and there are limits to what she can and can't do.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 9:13:54 GMT -5
I'm willing to sacrifice a small degree of stability if it means that we can limit polarization & two dimensional politics.
And if we're going to edify stability, would a one-party system not be the most stable?
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 9:07:19 GMT -5
The GG doesn't dissolve Parliament "on a whim".
Believe it or not, countries outside of the US do manage to have stable governments despite not using your "flawless" system.
Given that the Conservatives have a majority, they'll be governing for at least four years, short of something drastic happening.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:51:52 GMT -5
Taxation without representation, then? Given that there are taxes on income, sales, etc.
Uh, is there any truth to this, or is this guy just talking out of his ass?
Because you have to draw the line somewhere. 18-year-olds pay taxes, can serve in the military, etc. You'd have to change a shit ton of laws before you could justify taking the vote away from them.
How very unAmerican of you. If you want to live in a country run entirely on your beliefs, go buy an island somewhere and start you own dictatorship.
Blah blah blah, the poor and illiterate aren't human beings.
If you honestly believe that CEOs pay $750,000/year in taxes, I have a bridge to sell you.
Vote buying. Lovely. Too bad money can't buy you a sense of social justice.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:35:48 GMT -5
But the Liberal Party and New Democrats combined received a greater percentage of the vote than the Conservative Party. But the Conservative Party received a plurality of votes so it is governing party. So you're now being governed by a party that a majority of voters disagree with. The only mathematically perfect voting system is a majority-rules system between two candidates (May's Theorem). Which is why I support alternative voting. In two-party systems, people often end up voting for whomever they perceive to be the lesser of two evils. They're voting against, not for. I'm not fond of polarization & two-dimensional politics. A system which has more than two parties may not be mathematically perfect, but measures can be taken to eliminate the FPTP effect, and it allows for extra political dimensions.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:20:48 GMT -5
Granted, it now turns off at regular intervals.
I wish I had sleeping pills.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:15:29 GMT -5
I still think Germany had the right idea in banning them - German Federal law states that for any group to disseminate its ideas, it must publish them for everyone to see. Because the Church of Clappology wouldn't do that without making people pay, the Germans banned them outright. The US should really consider passing a similar law for tax-free status.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:13:30 GMT -5
Depressing thread is depressing.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 8:11:53 GMT -5
Each state has different laws regarding ballot access, but yes third parties can be and are listed on ballots. The Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Constitution Party (extreme conservative) are the most prominent (although that's still not saying much) third parties. If a "third party" candidate is to win, it's more likely going to be an independent candidate. Oi. 'round these parts, we have four major parties (Liberals [who are actually closer to being centrist], Conservatives, NDP [left-wing, very supportive of social programs] and BQ [representing Quebec's interests, with some separatist sympathies] -- though the BQ's future is uncertain after the last election), with a number of smaller parties listed on the ballots (Green Party, Christian Heritage Party, etc.) The governing party & opposition are usually made up of the Liberals and Conservatives, but during the last election, the NDP ended up becoming the official opposition, knocking the Liberals back into third place. This kind of shift is a good example of why I prefer more than two parties. If everyone is sick of the two biggest parties, they have others to choose from which may actually have a chance of gaining seats.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 7:47:47 GMT -5
^^ Personally, I'd prefer more than two parties, with ranked ballets. Two party systems risk becoming politically two-dimensional, and FPTP ultimately leads to a couple parties getting most of the vote. Out of interest, why do you only seem to have two political parties in the US? Are there any other parties? IIRC, the US isn't officially two party, but they've become an extreme example of first-past-the-post polarization. Long story short, they're de facto two party. While I'm not sure if they're registered or listed on American ballots, I do sometimes hear about smaller parties (Green Party, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 7:27:23 GMT -5
Hey, Republicans. I've got an idea for helping unemployment come down. It's called "Build another goddamn Hoover Dam (or similar) because doing shit to build infrastructure will make goods cheaper, give people jobs doing something useful and give you more shit to sell." 'Course, the GOP refuses to do anything that will actually help unemployment because there's a DEMOCRAT in the White House, and we can't have that. The far right is incapable of seeing more than five minutes into the future. They hear about plans that will have long-term benefits, yet all they can focus on is the immediate costs of getting the project going. That, and they don't actually give a fuck about the poor and unemployed.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 7:22:21 GMT -5
Because they're human beings with the same rights and freedoms as everyone else.
I like how everything that benefits someone who isn't rich, white and Christian gets labeled as 'communism' by these asshats.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 5:14:17 GMT -5
When something wakes me up just as I'm drifting off to sleep, and leaves me wide awake. Fuck you, person who decided it would be a good idea to honk your car horn in the middle of the night. I hope someone fucks you with a cattle prod.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 3, 2011 4:28:26 GMT -5
Hail Xenu
|
|