Distrust and disillusionment with politicians not just an American conflict...

[tenguzero]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050915/...life_survey_dc


A message to the political figures of the world: You're sucking. And you're sucking hardcore.

Maybe it's the technological wonders of things like the internet and satellite TV, maybe it's education, maybe it's a general frustration, or maybe it's a whole mixed bag of things, but the fact is, the global community is more in tune than it's ever been -- and 13% is a pretty crappy approval rating. I know statistics can be skewed, I know numbers can lie, and I know there are probably more things to take into account than might have been, but DAMN -- even if that number is off by a good deal, what do you want for a margin of error: 10%? 20%? That STILL puts it under 1/3 of the population. The 21st century is starting to catch up, and shine some light into the dark corners of the "haves" of society.

Our cellphones, news tickers, satellite television, 24-hour news stations, and all types of gadgetry are keeping us up to the minute on world affairs. If there's a revolution in a Latin-American country, we're on top of it. If there's a restart of a dormant nuclear reactor, we know about it within the hour. If there's a soldier, or a journalist, or a contractor killed in some country half a world away, we're finding out about it before the body has even reached the morgue. If there's a corrupt suit funnelling millions out of the pockets of hard-working investors, the scumbag's barely even touched his files before we're watching the FBI bust his door down. The world is actually beginning to almost coalesce into one body, with the sinews of networks and satellite transmissions and cellular communications pulling us together into an increasingly tighter global community. And as this happens, we're all starting to realize that maybe we aren't so different: 99% of us want peace -- we want to come home form a hard day's work and relax, we want to help each other out in times of need, we want to give back to the planet that has given so much to us, we want to see what's beyond our backyard, and we want to ween out the leaders who don't serve our wishes.

I think most of us would agree, it's pretty obvious that the world is headed for some rough times in the very near future. While all this has brought us closer as an international society, it's also given us new insight and new opinions on the things we percieve as important in our lives. And this has given us a new power we've never had before. However, the catch is that we don't all see eye to eye on everything, and while we all may have GOOD intentions, that doesn't necessarily mean they're the SAME intentions. And it's not just here in the U.S. -- it's a global thing. Don't even think for a second that there aren't a lot people at odds with a lot of facets in their society that they're just now getting access to. And they're seeing that there are a lot of pretty dumb people in pretty powerful positions, simply because they know someone, or have money, or are intimidating. A survey like this, as broad as it may be, is still better than any other attempts to bring this global dissolution to light. At the very least it supports something that most of us have had an inkling about for a while, but were never quite able to confirm it.

The future is definitely uncertain for our global society -- what's the right course to take? Is a UN style body what we want to mediate relations? Is a Laissez Fair, minimal government approach better? What about leaders chosen according to their academic or sociological skills? Is a utopian society possible? Will we have to undergo some sort of massive Third World War in order to allow for a remolding process to begin? One thing's apparent (and surveys like this confirm it) and that's the fact that, worldwide, we're ALL ready for some kind of change -- we demand it.

[T4 Primera]

In my country we have the seeds of an alternative. A couple of the minor political party's are in support of what they call binding referendums. IOW, citizens vote directly on an issue rather than vote who to delegate authority to.

This may seem a cumbersome way to govern a country and there is always the risk of insufficiently informed people casting votes. However, with the state of technology able to largely speed the process up and inform them as well, would they be any less informed than they are now about the politicians they are voting for.

Personally, I see the large disapproval rating as one of transparency. It matters not to me whether a candidate is good or bad if their affairs are not transparent enough for me to determine which is which. Secrecy is what enables the great crimes of the world to occur.

[YogsVR4]

Ross Perot method of governance. Majority dictates.

[T4 Primera]

True, and quite dangerous to minorities too when you put it like that. I guess the danger can be lessened to some degree by ensuring outcomes do not breach human rights. Property rights are a stickier issue. It's really difficult weighing up intangibles like public good vs individual loss and how much compensation is the right amount.

I guess he was right (Winston Churchill?) when he said that democracy was the worst form of government, except for all those other forms.