Quote Originally Posted by lars573 View Post
You've stated this several times. And every time I think that this view point was heavily influenced by the so called "greatest generation" of your father (pardon my assumptions about your age) and my grand father. That generation forged by a very harsh economic time, massive global war, and the nuclear fears that followed it. I believe that this generation was an aberration in it's views of civic participation and duty to society. And that this golden time and self less leaders who only took up office for the betterment of all never existed. Or if it did only sporadicly and briefly in very hard times for that society. That indeed all democratic societies the political class ALWAYS did it for either the challenge, the power, or the loot that the executive office or legislative seat offered. Or some combination of both. Really all that's changed is that it's become highly impossible to hide the dirty dealings for very long. That 100 years ago we'd never know how much of a crook Blair or Brown actually was cause people wouldn't take a better offer from the tabloids. To me the only serious degradation in our political discourse is personal loyalties.
That's a fair rebuttal, although as you note, there have been generations (few and far between, I'll grant) that had the sense of civic duty I am espousing. My argument is that if our representative democracies are to survive in the future - which you rightly note, is one of increased scrutiny - then representatives must re-discover or adopt a position whereby civic duty and responsibility outweigh the opportunity for corruption. In my view, without such a change, voters become ever more disenchanted and therefore disenfranchised. The oligarchies we see nowadays take less and less interest in the opinions of the common person, keeping them suitably anaesthetised with mindless entertainments. I consider that we are a long way down that path already, and that political activism in developed democracies is fracturing and being marginalised. Perhaps democracy can only truly be refreshed in dangerous times?

Quote Originally Posted by lars573 View Post
I also very much disagree with your stance on how the government should function. I believe that forcing people to serve in a legislature is a recipe for disaster. People who don't want to be in a certain position often as not will not perform well. And indeed it would lead to even more massive corruption and vote buying that currently goes on. Why? You yourself provide the answer. A jury is an audience for a trial, and legal dramas and VERY popular with the general public. However the conducting of government business (as would be seen by a legislature) isn't. That said I do believe that we should try and force the liberal bribery and seat buying that special interest groups have these days. Forcing any who want to fund a campaign for office or seat into a giant pot that any and all can dip into is as decent an idea I could ever come up with. I also disagree with term limits in the extreme. I feel that a much easier to use impeachment/recall system would function just as a well. That is a social contract of being able to sit in that chair so long as you don't peeve enough people at one time.
Again, you make good points but from a fairly cynical position towards people's willingness to participate in political activity. It may well be that you are proven right.

I believe that with good education (it is no coincidence to me that western leaders have spent much of the post-war years undermining real, discursive and analytical educational skills in favour of results-based, coached benchmarks) and civic duty - the concept, appreciated by others of society as a virtue worth celebrating in ways other than pecuniary, that devoting time and energy to the betterment of that society is a responsibility all citizens should embrace - our democracies could be revitalised. I really don't see how representative democracy will survive long without such commitments. This then, draws me onto another view, that citizenship and the related voting power is actually something to be earned, not universally granted at an arbitrary age of majority.

I note your opinions on term limits. My own view is that there is overwhelming evidence that politicians who stay in power much longer than six or seven years go barking mad, developing a sense of entitlement, just as it is rarely healthy for a party in government to last much longer than ten years without a refresh. Impeachment should be reserved for punishing wrongdoing, not as a method of removing old politicians. The remedy for that is competitive seats, where the incumbent has to work damn hard to ensure re-election (and to me, can only expect to represent that seat for a limited term).

And after all my verbiage, a completely inoffensive name puts it quite succinctly:

Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
There is more to being a citizen than just voting every few years.