Do you think Greens are good for you?

Discussion in 'The big picture' started by Baisteach, Mar 16, 2007.

  1. Baisteach

    Baisteach Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  2. ho-hum

    ho-hum New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Baisteach,

    I am a 20 plus year political party member and am always interested in politics so thanks for the link.

    From my understanding the Greens are a relatively 'new' party, meaning, their members are not from existing parties and are from a diverse range of the populous. This will always make cohesion difficult after the 'establishment' phase.

    I am all for 2 dozen different parties at any one time. It gives everyone a chance to vote for who they want as opposed to ''voting for them 'cos i dont like the other guys''. It also makes it a lot more difficult for vested interests to financially corner a perspective and buy votes/influence.

    Much of what the Greens propose is radical. Radical is also an extremely difficult thing to foist on any group or population so change tends to come by degree. When you start down the path of change by degree, which can be successful, you invariably run head first into compromise.

    Now here is the rub, as soon as you compromise towards a greater good then somewhere behind you somewill will cry foul or sellout. People will be left behind and will bitch about it.

    One of those guys made an argument I utterly detest along the lines of ''I used to be a Green in Qld'', implying that he wasnt any longer because of something the Greens had done. More often the case is as follows:

    a, Got a massive Telecom payout and bought a factory to make birdcages and now wants to import foreign birdcage makers

    b, Recently got a job as an organiser for a logging union

    c, Retired and likes Costello's superannuation stuff.

    d, Inherited money and bought a fish & chip shop on the coast in a coal mining region.

    None of these have anything to do with the Greens but past membership is dragged up everytime person wants to make a point.

    I would advise anyone to join a political party, it is the biggest game in town and is played whether you are involved or not. It is also worthwhile, enlightening and can be a lot of fun.

    cheers

    floot
     
  3. Richard on Maui

    Richard on Maui Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I like spinach... :wink:
     
  4. Michaelangelica

    Michaelangelica Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Re: Do you think Greens are good for you?

    Hey!

    This test will identify which of the major Australian political parties most aligns with your views. Just a little something to get you thinking in the lead up to both the elections this year! Forward it on to your contacts...

    https://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=206
     
  5. Baisteach

    Baisteach Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting, I'd say that they got me about right at Centre-Left. But they left out Fred Nile's mob and The Shooters' Party and the Independents, all of whom have made significant contributions to the governing of NSW.

    Edit: They do say major political parties but they put in Australia First and One Nation, these are hardly major parties as far as parliamentary representation goes.
     
  6. Michaelangelica

    Michaelangelica Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Re: Do you think Greens are good for you?

    OK done.

    In Tasmania the Exclusive Bretheran and the Brethern's money was out in force. They did a lot of damage.
    I don't think the Libs want to be seen any more allied to the Christian Right than they already are, so are trying to distance themselves from the bretheran. It would be great if we had a democracy that showed you where ALL the money for political donations is/was coming from

    Remember in the NSW State election it is OPTIONAL preferential voting so you can just go 1, 2 then scrub out the rest so your vote dies after 2 oe 3 or wahtever you want.
    Watch the Upper House though, as political parties register where THEY want your preferences to go, so if you just put 1 then THAT party gets to decide where your preferences go, not you.

    The political survey/questionnaire got me and both my kids about right too.

    I was surprised that the Nationals were very low on my list when I consider myself sympathetic to Country Views.
     
  7. Baisteach

    Baisteach Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Michael,
    The law has been changed, parties can no longerdrect where their preferences go.

    If you vote '1' above the line that's where it stays and there is a definite number that you must reach in below the line preferences (that should be in the instructions on voting day).
     
  8. Michaelangelica

    Michaelangelica Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Voting was not meant to be easy

    That's new?
    The number is Half the number of people to be elected, 10.5 (?) but still your vote should be counted if "your intentions are clear" i.e., you put numbers instead of crosses.
    As I read it the "1 above the line" continues through that entire group.
    https://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/local_g ... _of_voting

    https://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/state_g ... ve_council
     
  9. gnoll110

    gnoll110 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hum...

    Did it. Interestingly the party I have the _least_ affininty for, is the one I usually vote for (when I'm not voting informally).


    Gnoll110
     
  10. Michaelangelica

    Michaelangelica Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes makes you think doesn't it?
    I had Family First before the libs, which shocked me as I usually put them last, but I can't vote for them because of their attitudes to abortion contraception etc.
    Amazing that they have more progressive views on Family than the libs.
     
  11. ecodharmamark

    ecodharmamark Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    G'day Everyone :)

    My results:

    https://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/politic ... 8ea7243dbe

    I lied (I made out that I was a deep-green socialist)! The test is not designed for anarchists! Nowhere was there a third option - that is for self rule and regulation. An example being 'economics': I don't actually believe that the State should control this domain, nor the private sector for that matter. What I do believe is that 'all property is theft', and therefore I don't fit with either paradigm.

    The above example (one of many I could have used) fits with why I have not voted in any election in over 15-years. There is only one true democracy - and that is anarchy!

    Cheerio, Mark.
     
  12. Michaelangelica

    Michaelangelica Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    here is only one true democracy - and that is anarchy!

    Mark You will have to start your own party.
    The rest of us are stuck with what is there.
     
  13. Baisteach

    Baisteach Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Michaelangelica,

    Of course the 1 Votes continue within that group but previously a group could direct its preferences to any other group, that's how preference deals were done between parties, but no more.
     
  14. Baisteach

    Baisteach Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  15. frosty

    frosty Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Re: Do you think Greens are good for you?

    very interestiong test thanks or posting the link Michael :D

    some of those questions are really quite scary :evil: and I am horrified that there are people in australia who would hold such right wing views :cry:

    frosty scored 91% Green 8) :D ( of course )

    I should go to the other froum and defend the Greens but to be honest I cant be bothered :lol: :lol: I spent several years "fighting" the "wingnuts" on US forums and now I prefer to leave them to it and hope they all get what they deserve in the global warming hell they have created :evil:

    GREEN not GREED

    frosty
     
  16. ho-hum

    ho-hum New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting topic:




    AS LONG AS EVERYONE IS AWARE THIS IS ABOUT NSW ONLY AND MAY NOT BE THE CASE WHERE YOU LIVE AND IS NOT THE CASE FEDERALLY

    floot
     
  17. ecodharmamark

    ecodharmamark Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    G'day Michael :)

    That's exactly my point - I don't want anyone to join 'my' party. My 'party' is a very exclusive club - only one member - me :D! However I do often get together with others and form a collective where we decide (by consensus) on the next course of action to take, but this is very different system of governance from the traditional 'party' politics.

    What I would like to see in the future of state/federal/global politics is for people to create the situation for self-governance within their own communities, and work outwards from there. Everytime you vote you are effectively delegating your decision-making process to the politicians, you give up the process of careful thought preceding measured action. Who do you give this process too? Why either one of our two centralist forms of party governance - 'Tweedle Dum or Tweedle Dee'.

    Sure, I'd love to see the policies of the Greens become mainstream, but I would like to see that happen as a result of consensus, rather than competition. We've had so-called 'democracy' rammed down our throats for a few hundred years now, and what has it achieved? Nothing! We merely just ping-pong between one centralist party to another. A little to the left, then a little to the right. Sure, we've had some more radical elements enter the arena at particular times throughout history (Whitlam, Hanson, et al.), but essentially nothing else changes. Howard will probably go out in the next election to be replaced by whom? Rudd? Will we see wholesale rejigging of policies? No! What we will see is a little bit of tampering around the edges at great expense to the populace.

    No thanks, I prefer to do my 'voting' at the local level, through my local anarchist, Landcare, permaculture and local governance groups. At least here my votes counts! One person, one vote - and we don't move on until consensus is reached. How does one go about achieving consensus I hear you ask? Very simple - through a lot of hard work! Information is the key. Provide the people with accurate, non-biased information, based on a philosophy that interestingly enough mirrors the three base priciples of permacutlure: Care for the planet, care for the people, share the wealth. Create this deep level of understanding, and people can't help but live more happier, healthier and peaceful lives.

    Canadian academic, Stuart Hill (cited in Holmgren's Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability 2003: p. xxii) had this to say on the matter of 'bottom-up strategies for change':

    Thus my analysis of the situation is primarily psychosocial, rather than just political, and that is exactly what makes such a proposition so difficult to accept, because for me this requires that I first recognise and act on my responsibilities and change myself before pointing fingers at others, or at least while concurently doing this. This is not to deny the inequalities and oppressions that exist and need to be addressed within our societies, but rather acknowledge that each of these can be traced to collective and individual patterns of behaviour, which if not changed will continue to wreck havok with our precious planet, our societies and our individual wellbeing. Furthermore, I believe that the more empowered, aware, informed, competent and clear about our values that each of us is, then the more effective we are likely to be in bringing about the structural and institutional changes that are required. Trying to do the latter without addressing the former can only ever result in initiatives that will fail to address the causes of our problems and at best can only slightly reduce the levels of unsustainability and degradation.

    I'm not suggesting that the above can happen overnight. In fact, I doubt whether it will happen in another 50-100 years, so strongly entranched are the ruling class with their systems of 'democracy'. However, I sleep very well at night knowing that everyday I continue to plant the seeds of a truly democratic future - direct democracy - anarchy!

    Anyway, that's my rave for the week. Good luck to all those who vote, I hope you get what you want. Athough by the very nature of the system you are voting in, the majority of you will always come second (or third, or forth...) best.

    Oh well, back to the books for me...

    Cheerio, Mark.
     

Share This Page

-->