Posts by Bart Janssen
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Friday Music: Partners in Vacancy, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
and ‘feels’ like
That would require touching him - no thanks
-
Sigh.
And this was a fun thought experiment.
-
Southerly: A Blog on Behalf of an…, in reply to B Jones,
Isn’t that like the argument that women don’t need the vote because they have the ear of their husbands/fathers/brothers?
Don't be silly* - it's because they will only vote the way their husbands/fathers/brothers tell them to vote.
*which I am patently being now -
Southerly: A Blog on Behalf of an…, in reply to BenWilson,
Do you actually believe in democracy at all?
No of course not. Democracy is not something you "believe in". It isn't a religion, contrary to the way the US treat it. It is simply a system of governance with advantages and disadvantages over other systems.
The very reason the jury idea is interesting is because democracy fails to achieve what the public wants or needs. Even when it works reasonably well there are issues around the freedoms of minority groups - hence most democracies have constitutions that protect minorities from the majority.
So no I do not believe in democracy.
-
Southerly: A Blog on Behalf of an…, in reply to Rob S,
Maybe the jurors shouldn’t discuss there vote with each other
Someone suggested that maybe they should be a virtual grouping only. So they don't have to leave their homes but simply get information and vote online.
Of course if you are going that far you may as well allow everyone to vote.
-
Hard News: This time it's Syria, in reply to BenWilson,
I’d be pretty amazed if they could maintain an effective airforce for more than a few hours against a concerted attack by the USA
Syria is NOT Iraq or Lybia. Syria is relatively rich AND has spent a huge amount of it's wealth on arms - supplied mostly from USSR and now Russia. They have been "at war" with Isreal for decades (an actual declared war). Their military is constantly training for actual war. They have as modern a military as almost any country in the world.
The US also has the problem of where they can launch their attacks. At the moment because of the political situation they would be mostly limited to carrier based launches from the fleet in the Med, that makes everything more difficult. While I suspect you are right that the US would wipe out the Syrian air force I strongly doubt it would happen as quickly as you suggest.
In addition Syria has significant air defence capability, designed to defend against the Isreali air force. Flying US planes over Syria would be a risky proposition with significant losses. I really don't think it's as easy an option as you suggest.
-
Hard News: This time it's Syria, in reply to Russell Brown,
That doesn’t necessarily mean any kind of military intervention is a good idea
Yeah that's the problem for everyone I think, even the normally gung-ho US are moving slowly. There are a lot of players in the region that would love to manipulate intervention in Syria. There really are not clear simple targets. And nobody knows what the ideal outcome looks like let alone how to achieve it.
Add that to the (unlikely in my opinion) possibility that Ian raises that everything we think we know is wrong about the use of chemical weapons, it really makes intervention (dropping bombs on people) a terrible option.
-
Southerly: A Blog on Behalf of an…, in reply to BenWilson,
This is a parody argument?
Deadly serious. 12 is too many in a room. If, god forbid, they all express their opinions it is utter chaos, but much more common is that three or four dominate and the rest just nod. When you have fewer it becomes more likely that all will contribute – in my experience anyways.
-
Southerly: A Blog on Behalf of an…, in reply to BenWilson,
It would be nice to have a couple of other juries selected on talent.
Now you’re killing the idea completely. It’s no longer a democratic institution, but instead an elitist one.
That is the point. You are making the mistake of assuming democracy is good – it isn’t – it’s utter crap – just the best crap we have.
I’m not saying substitute elite juries for the random ones but adding elite/expert (for multiple values of elite) juries to the mix might improve things, ’cos they’re like expert and all.
And this is all in the spirit of bullshitting around a table because nobody expects this to happen because the people in charge would have less power and I doubt we’ll see them voting for that any time soon.
-
I think you wrote this too well Emma. There is nothing to say other than bravo.