Jonathan Freedland's remarkable idea of democracy in the Guardian.
"... when close to a majority of the country reaches a settled will on a matter of great import, that surely shouldn't be ignored. Yet the war went ahead anyway, endorsed by a large majority in the House of Commons. Whatever your views on the Iraq question, this surely amounted to a democratic failure: the system did not fully reflect the views of the people it is meant to represent."
Apparently a large majority in the House of Commons amounts to 'democratic failure'. I think it's called representative democracy, Jonathan - we've had it for some years now.
On an 'either-or' issue like going to war, where the country is fairly evenly split (I like that 'close to a majority', Jonathan - doesn't that imply 'not a majority' ?), ANY decision will not fully reflect the views of the people.
And when did the views of the people count for much with a Guardian columnist anyway ? Aren't they populist bigots ? Of course they aren't - as long as they agree with us.
Democracy - Guardian style.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment