Read on Twitter
On democracy as daily practice:
A friend of mine was complaining about some manifestos failing to contain extensive counter-arguments and counter-counter arguments for the policies proposed.
"What if manifestos aren't the place for this?"
"Then what is the place?"
A friend of mine was complaining about some manifestos failing to contain extensive counter-arguments and counter-counter arguments for the policies proposed.
"What if manifestos aren't the place for this?"
"Then what is the place?"
I was a bit baffled by this.
Don't get me wrong, more nuance and detail is good. I definitely look at vague bullet points less favourably than actual descriptions & arguments.
But I want to unpack several things here.
Don't get me wrong, more nuance and detail is good. I definitely look at vague bullet points less favourably than actual descriptions & arguments.
But I want to unpack several things here.
First, it's literally impossible to include every nuance. Which you include is a judgment call which reflects political orientations among other things.
e.g. welfare sceptics ask "How will you pay for that?" of social benefits. They may not ask the same of military spending.
e.g. welfare sceptics ask "How will you pay for that?" of social benefits. They may not ask the same of military spending.
An absence of certain details may reflect lack of thought or concern, or it may not. I think this needs to be judged in the round, given all the other information available about the party. It's not manifesto or bust. See also my previous comments. https://twitter.com/acertainjolene/status/1277462613970923521
Second, there's the question of why the manifestos and GE period proclamations are made to bear so much weight. Some of this is about how active various parties are the rest of the time, for sure.
But some of it is also about whether they are actively included.
But some of it is also about whether they are actively included.
"What is the place?" (for counter- and counter-counter-arguments)
EVERYWHERE! ALL THE TIME! Media, schools & other places of learning, libraries, townhalls, teach-ins, exhibitions, arts & cultural & community events, protests, parliament (& its committees & working groups)
EVERYWHERE! ALL THE TIME! Media, schools & other places of learning, libraries, townhalls, teach-ins, exhibitions, arts & cultural & community events, protests, parliament (& its committees & working groups)
If democracy is taken seriously, we CANNOT usefully have such convos only during 9-day festival. Govt should be funding & supporting such activities--& yes, actively inviting reps from parliamentary opposition--all the time. Media should always be seeking quotes from them.
What?! I expect govt to give prominence to opponents of its positions? Am I for real??
YES. Society's better when arguments are properly ventilated, our decision-making processes synthesise & incorporate them, & final result has deeper & broader quality of consensus as a result.
YES. Society's better when arguments are properly ventilated, our decision-making processes synthesise & incorporate them, & final result has deeper & broader quality of consensus as a result.
This, by the way, IS NOT WEIRD. It happens all the time in other places. I promise you it's true. Cross my heart.
Democracy is a culture & a daily practice, not just a set of bureaucratic rules & titles.
Democracy is a culture & a daily practice, not just a set of bureaucratic rules & titles.
But it doesn't have to be hari-kiri lor. I mean, you could just be more persuasive & build actual consensus for your position rather than relying on people not having access to other points of view.
If you don't want to do that--why ah? Why? https://twitter.com/ChinHongLoong/status/1278197278931476481
If you don't want to do that--why ah? Why? https://twitter.com/ChinHongLoong/status/1278197278931476481
And herein we see the problem https://twitter.com/ultrabisupreme/status/1278261587250343941?s=09
