Should issue based politics replace party based politics?
By vanny
@vandana7 (98731)
India
September 1, 2009 11:46am CST
I dont know about u all, but I am never satisfied with exercising my vote. I feel the issues that I feel about are not represented at all, and the other issues that are around are represented by a party that I dont wholly approve of. We (my non-virtual friends) were discussing this a few months ago. We felt that party politics should give way to individual politics where elected persons should be able to vote based on issues discussed at the parliament rather than following it as party polcy? And the issues to be discussed at each parliamentary session should be decided by people rather than the political parties. After all we do have computers and if we can participate in opinion polls of websites then why not participate on what we want discussed at the parliamentary meeting. It is tax payer's money after all. What is ur call on this? Please share ur views.
1 person likes this
3 responses
@anklesmash (1412)
•
1 Sep 09
yes then the governments main priority would be doing whats best for it's people rather than trying to remain in power
1 person likes this
@anklesmash (1412)
•
1 Sep 09
oh by the way i live in the uk and it's from my experience of the british government that i get my opinion
@stvasile (7306)
• Romania
1 Sep 09
Hello, vandana7!
Of course that everybody should have their saying in important decisions that affect us all as citizens, and therefore I support your opinion. There are, however, a few big setbacks in your proposition.
First of all, that's impossible because only a part of the citizens have a computer and are able to express their opinion this way. I don't know about India, but in Romania the number of people having an Internet connection is still small, and mostly restricted to the cities. Only a part of the citizens can express their opinion, and that wouldn't be fair. Of course, that opinion can serve as consultative for the decision takers.
The biggest setback is, in my opinion, the present day Parliament representation. For the law to change and for a proposition such as yours to be taken into account, a la must exist to support it. But the laws are voted by the people in Parliaments, and those people have no interest in voting such law, as it won't allow them to have such functions in the future (and that position earns them a lot of money)...
@vandana7 (98731)
• India
6 Sep 09
Hello stvasile, nice to c u in such mature discussions. :) Kidding Spartan. Even we dont have as many computers. Nor are many in rural regions that educated. :( But then, what is the status now anyway. They are voting for something they dont even now. I doubt if they understand that funds are being allocated to nuclear tests when they should in fact be used for linking the rivers first - to prevent drought and floods. I mean I could think of several things like that. Oh! I know. There will be brain drain if we get to that! But they should have their say in a democracy as I would. As things stand they just walk up affix thumb impression on some paper and are paid a few hundreds as they walk out by somebody from the party. That can definitely be avoided. In fact, I think that is black money that is disbursed! That money might just be enough to keep the brainy guys around! And we could definitely have Internet cafes all over in a couple of years. Yeah - law must change. If more people and more educated folks were to raise pertinent issues frequently and lobby for it through newspapers and other media off and on - politicians will be forced to take cognisanz. Anyways, it is a long way off - but it is a thought. :)
1 person likes this
@bhanusb (5709)
• India
2 Sep 09
An individual may be a honest person. It's difficult for him/her to be elected in parliament if he/she does not belong to a party. Now is the age of part politics. We have to support any political party.We vote for a party not for a person.Before giving our votes we judge the manifesto of the parties and their activities.This is the reality.
@vandana7 (98731)
• India
6 Sep 09
I beg to differ. Recently we had one gentleman called Jayaprakash Narayan. He contested independently and won with an overwhelming majority in one of the most populated parts of our city. He was an IAS officer once. So he is fairly intelligent. We could alternately have our own agenda - want nuclear tests or not, want rivers to be linked or not, want metro railways in these these cities or not, want army to acquire more sophisticate arms or not and so on and so forth and ask each individual to decide on spending a sum of Rs.100 on these ideas - duly mentioning the ratio against each issue that they consider important to them. We dont need all those fighting, arguing, we did this, we did that, no u did this u did that. Waste of time and money. At least I think so. We need servants there who will work rather than spend time like that. Thanks anyways for ur valuable opinion. Mine is just a thought not yet fully formulated. But I do believe it is possible. :) Have a nice day. :)
