Log in

No account? Create an account

It not a joke!!! It is the truth!!!

Giving people what they want: violence and sloppy eating

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
One person, one vote "too democratic" say Tories
mini me + poo
Conservatives believe it was a mistake to hand [electing the party leader] to the grassroots membership

  • 1
Thought provoking! I don't think that lack of a democratic structure is per se a damning criticism for a party, even one that did aspire to represent the electorate. You could have a party that's essentially one charismatic guy and his followers - should that have democratic leadership? Also, when you make a product, or write a play, you don't invite the population to vote on what it should contain. You create it in whatever ad-hoc way, and then the public gets to choose between your offering and other people's.

In my view, the traditional notion of a party involves the concept of partisan, by definition undemocratic, interests. The such-and-such group (the working class, the upper class, the bourgoisie, whatever) form a party in whatever exclusive way, and then you're invited to choose which of them is best at running the country as a whole. Admittedly, this idea sounds nuts, and there's no evidence to suggest it ever worked. But that is the status quo traditionally and in principle.

What you are suggesting, in a tagential manner, is that a party should be a candidate government for all, without any pretense of class or interest. In that case, everyone who takes an interest in politics should be a member of every party that they think is at all competent, take an interest in their affairs and help them elect the best leadership, policies, etc. That should result in several, well run, politically very similar centrist parties contesting the election. Arguably that's a more realistic way forward.

  • 1