Essay by Eric Worrall
Speaking to World Socialist Web Site, convicted Aussie climate activist Deanna Coco explains why we need a form of democracy which doesn’t involve public elections to solve the climate crisis.
Australian climate activist Violet Coco speaks on her jailing for Sydney Harbour Bridge protest
Our reporters 27 December 2022
…
In a serious attack on basic democratic rights, Coco was initially sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment, with at least eight months without parole, and denied bail. She was the first to be sentenced under laws introduced by the New South Wales (NSW) state Liberal-National government to impose fines of up to $22,000 and jail terms of up to two years for protests on roads, rail lines, tunnels, bridges and industrial estates.
…
VC: People are becoming increasingly concerned about the lack of action on the climate and ecological emergency and that is a threat to the people who are making a lot of money off the fossil fuel industry. The more we make noise about the climate and ecological emergency the more they are threatened. It makes sense that they are going to try and silence us, and we can’t let their bullying tactics get in the way of protecting the habitability of our planet.
WSWS: What are the political implications of the fact that both Labor and the Liberal-National Coalition support the implementation of these laws to defend the profits of big business?
VC: It is clear that our politics has failed us and what we need is a different form of democracy to resolve this emergency situation. I have done a lot of work with Extinction Rebellion, who promote citizens assemblies. It is a form of deliberative democracy with a random and representative selection of the population, informed and facilitated. A bit like jury duty, but for legislation.
We cannot trust either Labor or the Liberal-National Coalition to act in our best interest.
…
Read more: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/27/efxg-d27.html
Climate activist attacks on forms of democracy which aren’t delivering the outcomes they want are nothing new.
The reality is all activists need to do to get their way is persuade ordinary people to support them. But despite decades of disappointment, activists still can’t bring themselves to admit the failure is their fault. They just aren’t persuasive enough.
It was Winston Churchill that stated…
“Democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried”
I wasn’t aware you had beaten me to the Churchill point when I posted mine Bryan. Clearly an example of like mindedness.
The power of democracy was cancelled once the National Socialists had taken control in Germany in the early 1930s.
The Russian system of government hadn’t experienced democracy when the communists effectively banned it, once they had control of the levers of authority.
China via the CCP never allowed democracy to gain popularity. Now they look increasingly threatening to the only democratically administered part of China they claim the right to administer via communist power.
Hong Kong is a clear example of what happens when totalitarians take control of a formally open democratic state.
The examples of lost democratic freedoms are all around the world, there for all to see. Those examples are also the places where the Climate Alarmists never go and never will.
That tells us something.
It is an example of how fascist regimes take control. First they use democracy to gain control of the elected government, often by intimidation. Then they start discrediting the rule of law and democracy and, once they have control of sufficient public thinking, change the laws so that democracy has no chance of electing another government. The most obvious examples are Hitler, Mussolini (actually he was the first!), and Franco. No doubt you can think of others closer to the present.
Bryan, Rod, and Gary, please remember that the United States of America is not a Democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic. The difference is explained in this fable: two wolves and a sheep traveled together across a country. They stopped for the night and discussed what to eat for dinner. Since they believed in democracy they agreed to vote. The sheep voted for grass, and the two wolves voted to eat the sheep. What happened? If they were in a Democracy the two wolves ate the sheep. If they were in a Constitutional Republic the sheep had individual rights that are self-evident and unalienable, which included not being eaten, and they went to an International House of Pancakes instead.
Please remember that a Constitutional Republic IS a Democracy!!!!! A simple dictionary definition will help educate you. Merriam-Webster:
“democracy: [noun] a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”
Thank you, but I do not need educating. The process is democratic, but the USA is a Constitutional Republic. Have you forgotten about the Supreme Court? They don’t allow wolves to eat sheep (figure of speech).
Again, a Constitutional Republic IS a democracy. If you cannot at least accept the definition of a democracy, then you are too uneducated to continue discussion.
I fear that both you Ron and Don are looking a bit like two bald men fighting over a comb.
The unpleasant truth is that the Constitutional Republic in the USA and the Democracy here in the UK (and I certainly understand the difference), both of which used to work mostly, are now both well down the road to perdition.
There are many reasons for that, the Climate and Covid scams being but the two most obvious. Relentlessly exploited and enforced by some very bad actors indeed.
But I’d be interested in seeing either of you stick out their chest and say that everything is working out fine.
It isn’t.
I used to worry that things might head to major violence on the street. Now I worry that there is violence on the street alright, but the media, academia, politicians and plutocrats are absolutely fine with violence on the street as long as the perpetrators are hard left.
Democracy is mob rule.
The distinction between a Constitutional Republic and a democracy is the recognition of individual rights that a majority shouldn’t be able to trample.
The reason we are in such dire straights is due to the majority of the propaganda pushing a narrative rather than looking at the data.
People thinking that the opinion of an apparent majority is okay because of “democracy”. It is really a bunch of people ignorant of the facts or with a neferious agenda.
This is leading to ruin.
What you are referring to is a DIRECT democracy. We are NOT a direct democracy, but a representative democracy; a democracy nonetheless. My God, how civics education has gone to hell.
Don Perry, why not experience a little introspection and google: united states a constitutional republic? Some of the sources that show up even refer to a constitutional federal republic, but none say it is a democracy.
Please educate me. Where in the founding documents is the country’s form of government ever referred to as a democracy?
It is referred to as a republic, a form of democracy (rule by the people) in which the chief of state is not a monarch. There is no need for the founders to call it a democracy as “democracy” is inherent in the definition of “republic”. For God’s sake, man, just go to a dictionary to learn basic definitions. Better yet, start you lack of education by reading “Democracy in America” by Alexi d’Tocqueville. I’m done. You are simply too ignorant for argument.
Hey Don,
Forget the dictionary, read the US Constitution. It promises a ‘republican’ form of government.
Do a word search on the Constitution – look for ‘democracy’ or any derivative of that word.
And since you’ll come up with a blank, explain why a dictionary definition has any bearing on the subject.
I think you are the one who is “simply too ignorant for argument. If you honestly believe that a democracy and republic are the same, I am forced to think you either failed Civics or your teacher woefully failed you.
You can’t provide anything to substantiate your statements other than something written by a Frenchman about 60 years after the founding of the country. Granted d’Tocqueville was a noted political philosopher and all around decent chap but, not a source of original intent or, apparently, accuracy.
I’ve heard that ignorance is bliss.
Are you full of bliss or something else?
Our representative Constitutional Republic uses a mixture of Representatives and Senators elected by the general public, election of the president by the Electoral College, appointments of judges and agency heads by the president, with approval by the Senate, and direct hiring of many high-ranking bureaucrats. The public does not vote on federal legislation, as happens in some states, or in direct democracies. While some democratic processes are employed, it is inaccurate to call the government a “democracy” when there is such a wide range of processes used to select those who govern.
When I was in high school, I won a BofA award for an essay entitled “I Speak for Democracy.” I would not write the same thing today!
“My God, how civics education has gone to hell.”
You can include California in that list, and they way they are changing election laws to ensure that the Democrats never lose an election in the future.
Don’t worry. You’ll get rid of “Democracy” soon as the Great Reset is instituted. You’ll have “Techno-Feudalism” and you’ll love The China Model” All the decisions will come from Davos and the WEF.
And they will be at the bottom of the heap like everyone else. Own nothing, eat bugs and be happy. May be allowed a candle per week for night time lighting if good.
The Great Reset ?
Wasnt that what they mean by the ‘New deal’ in the 1930s….. went to ruin since then , or not
Its just incoherent babble you are preaching
Rather than babble, “The Great Reset” is a book by World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab, seeing the China virus as a chance to reorder the world into WEF’s way of thinking.
But I guess that is incoherent babble – with consequences.
When Churchill was asked about democracy he made this prescient comment.
‘Democracy is the worst form of government, except for everything else that has been tried’…..
The Climate Alarmists have tried promoting anarchy and have been defeated by the better educated/more rational public voice. Their desire to overthrow an imperfect political system that works and replace it with something they imagine would be good for them, tells us everything we need to know about the naivety of the Climate Alarmists.
Their awareness about the relationship between power and corruption is straight out of sixth grade.
They’ve been pushing dictatorship, not anarchy.
Anarchy is one tool they use. Once the current order is destroyed, the new rulers will eliminate the anarchists next.
Spot on.
Depends how you define, or are willing to accept a definition of, “anarchy”….
Hmmm… Open to correction but a casual search suggested this bint was also involved in the ‘burning pram’ stunt outside APH in Canberra.
Repeat offender?
I am just more upset that the woman who steering locked her head to the steering wheel of her hire car wasn’t prosecuted under the same laws. If I recall she got off by basically crying at how upset she was at the state of the climate.
Not upset enough to stay in Victoria instead of traveling to Sydney for the protest. Unnecessary Travel(tm) boys and soys. You need to cut back on it if you want to save the planet.
Also we get to see the only casually hidden true objective of many from the Left.
“Everything would be better if only WE were in charge”.
They lack the skills to be successful in life, and the public support to get elected into power, so they demand the rules be changed.
Anyone else would either accept their position in life and make the most of it, or harden up and improve via hard work and determination. Them? Nope. “The System is Oppressing ME!!!”
They want success given to them. Not won. Given.
The problem with these pathological lefties is they all fancy themselves as the omniscient benevolent diktater. Statistical probability isn’t their best subject which makes them useful idiots and easy prey for the real smart operator and resultant Fearless Leader. Rinse repeat with the interring and slaughtering of millions as usual.
At least she hasn’t become a Violent Cuckoo, yet!
Australia seems intent on entrenching a racist and discriminatory Indigenous “Voice” to Parliament within it’s Constitution, despite no-one actually bothering to detail how any of this “Voice” will actually work – despite there already being 50+ Indigenous representative bodies already advising and making submissions on Indigenous matters to Parliament.
So it makes sense … that we should create a Green “Voice” to Parliament within the Constitution, despite the 3rd largest political party in Australia being the Greens.
Obviously this proposed Green ‘ Voice’ would be sympathetic to any Indigenous ‘Voice’, but this Green ‘Voice’ is trying to save the planet and should thereby overlay all other ‘Voices’.
At least until we get an Anti-Misogyny ‘Voice’ and Trans-rights ‘Voice’.
You can be guaranteed the only ‘Voice’ that wont matter – is yours…
We already have 11 politicians of indigenous backgrounds democratically elected to federal parliament, Question is, if Albo’s “indigenous voice to parliament” is passed and becomes reality, then WHO will have the last say ?? will it be the democratically elected politicians, or the unelected appointees ?? Unless such details are sorted out before the referendum, then the ONLY way to vote will be NO…
Yes ‘The Voice’ is a disgusting slur on the 11 worthy democratic voices in Parliament now. No to Albo and Co’s unelected mob of whiners and taxeating bludgers. Plenty of ‘useful contacts’ to consult already on that score for actual decision-making-
https://diversityarts.org.au/app/uploads/ReportingonAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderPeoplesandIssues_Handbookv2.pdf
No shortage of voices whatsoever.
That does not count. You should know that by now.
As it is the Voice will be the Voice and the VOICE will be final.
Just look at nw Zealand and its voice with the water legislation..
The Voice will fix all-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/markets/darwin-cbd-retailer-paul-arnold-installs-panic-room-in-his-store-as-others-report-being-punched-grabbed-by-drunken-itinerants/ar-AA15W28h
Oh the irony if they demand bringing back the cashless welfare card eh Albo?
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/albanese-defends-decision-to-scrap-patronising-cashless-welfare-card-20220728-p5b5gh
”VC: It is clear that our politics has failed us and what we need is a different form of democracy to resolve this emergency situation.”
All I can say is… Just keep on talking love.
When at first you don’t succeed, change the rules, and cry cry again.
I agree; keep feeding her and her ilk the oxygen of publicity and they will fall for that hook line and sinker – seems “they” are blinded by the limelight and don’t know when to shut up; long may that continue.
Isn’t it ironic that Extinction Rebellion has decided that public disruption will be discontinued because it hasn’t caused any changes?
Democracy? I won’t offer the quote Churchill for a third time but I wondered if he ever contemplated some thing like:
I would have thought “random representative” was an oxymoron. But, again, that is not surprising because Violet Coco sounds like a moron.
First of all, our Founding Fathers absolutely hated democracies because they always devolve in to the tyranny of the 51% over the 49%..
That’s why the U.S. was established as a Federalist Constitutional Republic to protect our individual rights from government tyranny through a complex structure of checks and balances between the three government branches, very specific enumerated Federal powers, and all unenumerated powers entrusted to the individual states or to the citizens..
Accordingly, each state should have its own specific EPA regulations instead of one federal EPA setting regulations for all states.
A pox upon the Paris Accord and the Federal EPA which has been such a destructive burden to our: individual rights, state rights, businesses, public education and economy.
This all changed, not for the better, when the 17th Amendment was passed. That changed the structure of the checks on the Federal government by the States.
The 17th Amendment changed the selection of Senators from appointed by the state legislatures to a direct election by the people. The purpose of the original selection process was for the Senators to represent the State in the Federal government not the people. The people are represented by the members of the House by direct election. The Founders also wanted the three entities that control our government, the President, the Senators and the House members, to be selected by three different methods to prevent one group from monopolizing those entities.
Repealing he 17th is imperative if we are to survive as a Nation of the People, by the People and for the People.
Tom-san:
Yes, Wilson was an awful racist scoundrel who hated the Constitution, which is why he pushed passage of the infernal 17th Amendment.
We can also thank Wilson for establishing the Federal Reserve Bank under his regime, which is another reason why we have boom/bust economies..
BTW, did you know the Federal Reserve increase M1 money supply from $4 trillion in early 2020 to $21 trillion in 2022 because the US foolishly closed down its economy for 2 years under the insane COVID lockdowns and were obviously obligated to compensate Americans who were forced to quit working?
in other words, I took 244 years to get the M1 money supply to $4 trillion, and during the insane lockdown, we were increasing M1 by $4 trillion every 6 frigging months….
No wonder we have high inflation, which is a function of money supply…
Not to disagree with you but we had boom bust cycles before the Fed. The Fed was intended to prevent them because the progressive ideology was that science could control everything. Formerly cycles were caused by bad harvest or the discovery of new gold or silver deposits. With the Fed, the cycles occurred less often however they were more extreme.
The economy can be controlled however once you mix politics into the Feds mission, we pay an expensive price. The Fed failed shortly after it’s creation, with the great depression, during Johnson-Nixion-Ford-Carter, Obama and Biden. I make an exception for Bush 2 because he was dealing with a war. Yes, government spending is a big part of the problem but at least the Fed could control that with the interest charged for the money the federal government uses. Letting anyone have cheap money is a recipe for disaster. Letting a government have cheap money is worst.
Dont know your economic history. The boom bust cycles were worse before the Fed ….apart from the Great Depression and that was because of a ultra conservative Fed and republican government did nothing.[Long Depression of 1873 was 5 1/2 years]
never happens like that now as the New deal changed all that so that recessions are much shorter length
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
Dena-san:
Central Banks’ central roll has become to keep bubble economies going with cheap interest, low rates allow financing of humongous national debts (US’ now $31 trillion), and to keep cheap money for oligarch political donors…
The best way to avoid boom/bust economies, limit government spending, limit government debt, and economically sound interest rate, is to have free-floating interest rates that are determined by banks competing amongst themselves.
When the economy is strong, interest rise as demand increase for available limited capital increases, and when the economy slows, interest rates fall as demand for money decreases and banks must lower interest to attract customers…
Money supply should just increase at the rate of population growth less percent increase of production efficiency.
I still blame Trump for not putting the Paris Accord to a senate vote when it was sure to fail. Then again, the Brandon administration would be sure to ignore the vote.
Looking at the last big Senate vote, I’m not so sure that would have been a good idea.
Treaty Needs 2/3 majority in Senate not a bare majority or the 60 votes for cloture
I am quite aware of that. What was the final vote tally in the “last big Senate vote” I referred to?
I don’t see any time, even 2017-18, where it would have been “sure to fail”. Republicans have been too compromised for too long.
Passing the years big budget bill (68-29) is hardly a comparison to a a ‘treaty type’ vote
At least those senators were honest about the earmarks they put in and voted for , unlike those House republicans who got their earmarks in and then voted against on party lines, knowing it would pass.
We can see already that the GOP caucus has around 15-20 wreckers, who want to ‘destroy the village in order to save it’
I suppose you just have more faith in Senate Republicans that I do.
That isn’t even close to the truth. They can never be persuasive enough when they are trying to persuade stupid nonsense. They could never get their way in the manner she is suggesting unless they can completely control the selection of who get to vote..
They tried the alternative ‘assembly’ here in the UK Indoctrinated and led to reach the ‘right’ conclusions
And then it disappeared without trace
Trying to bypass democracy didn’t work
https://www.climateassembly.uk/
Basically Coco the Clown wants a form of democracy that allows her to get her way. A thoroughly evil person.
“Basically Coco the Clown wants a form of democracy that allows her to get her way.”
I think you nailed it.
Coco the Clown es muy loco!!
Regards,
Bob
Pioneers always bite the dust first.
Synopsis: Deanna Coco: “We need a different type of democracy, we need authoritarian democracy!”
aren’t the people making money from FF millions of teachers , policeman , public servants and others whose retirement funds include significant investment in FF companies ? at least those not foolish enuf to dump their FF stocks to follow the ESG chimera ?
Violent CooCoo eponymously named
In her Marxist-Leninist paradise, she would either be sent to a reeducation camp, or shot outright.
Probably the latter. Useful idiots, and she qualifies as that, are usually dealt with quickly once the marxist-leninist utopian goal is reached. “Can’t fix stupid”, and she is obviously not terribly bright.
Sounds like she supports the “different type of democracy” epitomized by Madame Lafarge – voting with guilotines.
Socialists hate democracy, always have, always will. Climatism is merely today’s flavor du jour of socialism/communism.
You know how to tell a socialist from a communist? The communist admits that their revolution can only be achieved and maintained by the barrel of a gun. The socialist won’t.
Perhaps XR would approve of communism (with people’s councils). Or fascism.
Either way they are simply good old fashined authoritarians and totalitarians.
XR only want to get rid of democracy because there are not enough people agreeing with them. Thank god that it is democracy that (a) gives us free speech and (b) allows rational people to ignore extremists like XR.
XR, like all their off-shoots, spout neo-marxism – but within a neo-feudalist framework.
Sanction of the Victim: The economically unproductive trying to convince the economically productive to surrender their well-earned privilege.
Man: We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune! We're taking turns to act as a sort of executive-officer-for-the-week-- Arthur: (uninterested) Yes... Man: But all the decisions *of* that officer 'ave to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting-- Arthur: (perturbed) Yes I see! Man: By a simple majority, in the case of purely internal affairs-- Arthur: (mad) Be quiet! Man: But by a two-thirds majority, in the case of more major--Will you take a wheelbarrow of leaves – official currency – for that?
Quote:
VC: It is clear that our politics has failed us and what we need is a different form of democracy to resolve this emergency situation.
So who is this ‘we’? Does it include China, for instance?
Note the characteristic form of reasoning. We need in this country, wherever the speaker is from, a less democratic form of government to tackle climate.
But there is never any argument to show that having it in this country would make any difference to the world climate.
Conclusion has to be, this is just inventing bad reasons for what the speaker wants to do on other grounds which they are not admitting.
Yes. They need the type of democracy where they, and people like them tell you what to do, and you do it. Or else.
Coo coo democracy style I suppose is what she wants but could have the same fate Robespierre did in 1794 if she amazingly succeeds in her government-based delusions.
Climate crisis? Could someone please be intelligently specific . I have been searching for 30 years and havnt found it yet
I have been searching for 30 years and havnt found it yet
You’re obviously too intelligent to read the papers and watch TV. That’s where ‘it’ all is.
And issue free Get-Out-of-Jail cards for all
She’s right. It’s hard to imagine anyone voting themselves back to the stone age.
They have so little foresight that they don’t see it coming.
The strength of democracy is that it makes it harder for a small clique to ruin everything, but the a country’s people certainly can still foolishly vote for their own ruin.
The different form of democracy she wants was planned and articulated by the Russian thinker and political activist Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924). He called it Democratic Centralism.
The best analytic works that explain the marvelous successes of Lenin’s political thinking are:
“The Gulag Archipelago” by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulag_Archipelago
And The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression • Stéphane Courtois ed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism
You have been warned.
Alinsky simplified the scheme into 8 levels of control:
1) Healthcare– Control healthcare and you control the people, especially the aged.
2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control– Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)
6) Education and Media – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school and what the general public are exposed to.
7) Religion – Remove the belief in God from the Government and schools
8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
I would add to the list that Alinsky made to bring it to the modern authoritarian program:
9) Energy Control. – All activity is limited by energy. Restrict reliable energy and you accelerate the spread of poverty, debt, welfare, and class warfare.
The green loonies are some of the useful idiots that have bought into the propaganda for the Great Reset.
“It is a form of deliberative democracy with a random and representative selection of the population, informed and facilitated. A bit like jury duty, but for legislation.”
Jurist are selected after both lawyers get to question and approve or reject them in the presence of a judge.
Sounds like she wants “mob rule” with her groups getting to pick the mob’s rulers.
It is these mew government controlled cashless society schemes that are really sending a chill down my spine lately. This has the potential to destroy all our individual liberty in one swipe of the pen. Very very scarey.
Asking for a new form of democracy by asking to undermine democracy. The propaganda continues. Her view of a good democracy is one where she gets what she wants no matter how many others disagree – exactly the thinking of dictators everywhere. In reality these people are just a new form of stupidity accompanied by a privileged sense of self-righteous entitlement. Fifteen months of self reflection in custody is probably not nearly long enough to cure this mental illness.
It is clear that our politics has failed us and what we need is a different form of democracy to resolve this emergency situation.
Those steenkin’ voters are just too dumb. We need a bigger mob! Round ’em up, get ’em in the streets! Tell ’em anything that will rile them up, and shoot a few policemen.
She needs to move to a planet that “actually has” a climate crisis.
Where do we sign the pettition to send her to Venus?
There is no such thing as democracy – Brexit showed that even when a majority vote for something, if it’s the wrong something as required by the establishment, they will make it go away, insidiously, but definitely
Reminds me of Obama explaining that the reason why ObamaCare wasn’t more popular was because he hadn’t given enough speeches.
Whos paying for your health insurance then. I wish you a long and well life as you will suffer if get a serious illness, insurance or not.
Who is paying for my Healthcare? Not Obama.
Obamacare is just a system of health insurance by private companies.
let me guess that you are on Medicare? ROTFL
Yet we can’t get rid of it, can we? How many people believe they were better off (re healthcare) before ObamaCare? I know my family was.
You want to try living in the UK. Even when you vote for the winning government, Tories, they don’t implement their manifesto. So what is the point in voting?
Not much different in the US. The Republicans lie to their voters about being conservative (liberal in other countries) and the Democrats lie to everyone else about being centrist.
No so. The US democrats are generally conservative-centrist by other western standards. Sat germany France , UK or Australia. Theres a small number of ‘progressives’ in the Dems who are more aligned with the standard left wing parties in Europe.
The far right Europeans ( maybe under 20%) are aligned with most of the GOP
What she means is communism.
The brilliant economist Thomas Sowell had this to say about “activism”:
“Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.”
A bit like jury duty, but for legislation.
If this is the comparison then clearly this ‘expert’ doesn’t understand legal systems either.
The Jury system is to allow crimes to be judged before a jury of their peers. It is intended to show that the law is applied evenly and fairly as a trial.
What our expert is forgetting is that the Jury are not investigating the case, or applying the law once a verdict is decided. They are observing as unbiased and making decisions based on the evidence provided to them.
Your Nation May Vary but the actual Judge then passes sentence.
So all we really have is a group of observers being provided source info by subject matter experts.
So, if we shift this model sideways to this ‘Experts’ idea, a ‘jury’ of randomly selected people would be asked to approve laws made by someone else. No disrespect but you can’t ask Bob from down the road to create laws – it is not his skill set. He is a cabinet maker. All Bob can do is say “I guess that makes sense…”
So our ‘Expert’ basically wants some elite group of experts – which she casually doesn’t mention – to create laws and then unskilled and possibly uninterested random strangers will rubber stamp them.
Yeah. Scratch a Green and get dictators under your fingernails.
It’s the old story: when you’re losing the game either take the ball and go home or change the rules in your favor. The alarmists want to outlaw any democratic form of dissent regarding their climate panic-mongering, so they want the rules changed regarding who can say what, particularly when their arguments are regularly refuted.
Winston Churchill also said that 5 minutes talking with an average voter was enough to put you off democracy. And so I agree that this suggestion has some merit as suggested by another person. At elections, at least 95% of the voters are ignorant of most of the issues so they have no knowledge to guide their voting. A good example is why the UK Conservative Party is currently the government when it is NOT a conservative party but a centre-left bunch that are virtually the same as the Labour Party. Therefore most people vote hoping that somebody else knows more than they do but then swamping them with ignorance votes. But if the size of the electorate was reduced to say 20 in each area, those 20 would know that their vote can actually achieve something and would seek to be well-informed. The flaw is still that the MPs we elect are still going to be morons….