Something for the weekend?

To those readers of more tender years than I, that question was always the parting one of your barber as they always had a stock of male contraceptives; however this article is intended to make you focus on cerebral activity rather than those physical.

Some articles, over which you may wish to mull, are highlighted.

Adrian Vatter, Professor of Swiss Politics at the University of Bern, asks whether the Swiss Burka ban is a tyranny of the majority as it amounts to the discrimination of religious minorities. In response to that: If one chooses to leave one’s homeland and live in what is a foreign country, then is it not reasonable that you be asked to adhere to that country’s social requirements? If wearing a burka is that important, then are there not sufficient countries from which a choice can be made?

Bruno Kaufman, writing on Swissinfo, asks: Is Europe (EU) giving direct democracy a second chance? when referring to a statement by Frans Timmermans speaking about the European Citizens Initiative (ECI) because he said: We are living in a post-paternalistic era but are stuck with a paternalistic system of government and: Citizens need to get a chance to engage more directly. This comes as a result of the reported decision of the EU Commission to revise the ECI Directive, so this article by Swissinfo states. It never ceases to amaze me that those practicing the ‘art’ of representative democracy always talk about the need to involve the people and give them more of a voice in their daily lives. Is this a covert submission that representative democracy is, in fact, a form of democratised dictatorship? That it will never happen is because to so do would, logically, weaken the power of those who practice democratised dictatorship – and that ain’t ever gonna happen, at least until the people miraculously come to the senses.

Philip Hammond hints that his party, if elected to government on June 8th, may well renege on a previous manifesto pledge not to raise income tax, national insurance and vat, citing among other reasons the cost of Brexit. That pledge, made in the manifesto of the 2015 general election, had obviously not been thought through; no doubt because it never crossed the minds of these numpties that the British people might, as a result of the promised referendum, upset their plans. This further begs the question just why do political manifesto pledges promise we will do this we will do that when they must know damn well it is but an aspiration – they don’t even add the words: circumstances permitting.

The Turkish people living in Switzerland roundly rejected Erdogan’s referendum requesting he be granted even more power than he already holds. Now why might that be?

Beggars in Bergen (Norway) are said  to no longer feel secure in the city following a documentary by national broadcaster NRK. ‘Begging’ takes many forms, one of which is when people seek assistance from the state by accepting ‘benefits’ offered to them for having too many children. What happened to the old idea of if you can’t afford something, then don’t have it? Just when did the people, collectively, agree to fund the ‘largesse‘ of others?  On a similar question of largesse,  just when did the people, collectively, have the opportunity to agree that Members of Parliament could, on the back of being Members of Parliament, supplement their income with 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th incomes?

At whichever aspect regarding the future of our nation we care to look, all we see is that decisions are being taken by those who know not about anything, other than what may further their own self-aggrandisement – of which a classic example is Brexit.

One can only hope that the British people undergo a ‘Damascene Conversion’ and, realising they are being led up the garden path, say: enough is enough, we  are not sheep.

Direct democracy may well have its deficiencies, however of all the systems of democracy so far devised it does provide those indigenous peoples that practice that system the right to decide just what can and cannot be allowed within their nation and society – unlike nations that practice representative democracy, where politicians decide what the people can and cannot be allowed in their, the peoples, nation and society.

I know which system under which I would rather live.

One thought on “Something for the weekend?

  1. “Turkish people living in Switzerland roundly rejected Erdogan’s referendum requesting he be granted even more power than he already holds. Now why might that be”? –

    This might be off-topic or at best parallel to the post here but it has been noted that the Turks abroad do divide themselves into pro and anti-Erdogan. Also known is that Erdogan encourages the latter to spy on the former. It must be clear that there is a risk violence breaks out between these two groups. That Turkish domestic politics ends up being fought out on the streets of European cities is possible and unacceptable. We must look into the sense of allowing dual citizenship in the light of this.

Comments are closed.