Propositions

I post badly written shite , theres no doubt in the writing , my grammar is for shit , but the content on the other hand is there to offer a view or two.

My blogs are not just about indy, its also about returning to democracy , socialism , and removing the neoliberal system that has replaced them under the lie of capitalism.

For Scotland at least that means the political accountability of independence being more than just national , but includes local as the only way forward. However some of the ideas I post about arent strictly Scots regional or national , especially housing and energy which can be done anywhere.

This article though is about empowering the electorate , evolving democracy.

NaeMairMaisters

Democracy 2.0?

We live in days of "fake news" , of bankrupt billionaire presidents elected to drain swamps , that rub their hands as they increase the numbers and size of swamps. Of days where the BBC is as bad , if not worse than North Korean broadcasting – but at least the North Koreans arent paying a licence fee for theirs. Days of where billionaire tax avoiding media barons are shaping Western democracy , installing millionaire politicians to increase the wealth of both of them regardless – while screaming the Russians are coming.

Democracy hasnt changed , the wealthy have always had the methods and means to subvert democracy – so until thats redressed then we fight larger powers , or try to , ironically with a horse of the different colour.

We have the illusion of a vote means change , where a two party system is the norm , where those two parties are now one , and the electorate the second point of enabling. Politics is still therefore the two party system that it always was , the one King rule though has been replaced by many smaller kings.

Sure we have had tinkers at reform , the illusions of democratic referendums on the EU or Scots Indy , but as long as we have the rich and state both being one and the same , then it is exactly that – an illusion that we arent still ruled. Which is ironic considering brexit happening , but hey thats based on similar illusions.

Where other democratic tinkering has been enacted, as in the case of D'Hondt and the list system as Proportional Representation in Scotland, it has removed first past the post of old democracy as THE ACCOUNTABILITY WEAPON of dissenting change , and subdued future if not better democratic change with it.

The current system in Scotland, the regional list, by protecting some politicians at the expense of others , well it prevents change in party rather than listening to the voter. Dare I say it it CREATES voter apathy where you can reject both party and constituent at the constituency level , and somehow have the same politician badly represent you regardless. Thats like rejecting a boot in the balls, only to hear a whoosh of air as the same boot homes in on its target anyway – now with an extra added grudge.

The ball boot analogy is frankly very similar to the Democratic Deficit of Westminster for Scotland , and I know before you start its the same in the English North , where regardless of what Scotland votes for in a majority , for seats in Westminster thus a GOVT we still get what 42% of English voters want regardless.

Nothing is more evident in that democratic deficit than the EU ref creating brexit , where 62% of Scotland voted to remain in the European Union in an ADVISORY REFERENDUM (on far more favourable terms than even its members EVEN get) , yet is dragged out regardless.

While Scotland historically voted Labour it got Tories, when England eventually once again started voting Labour, resulting in Blair in number 10, well it was still voting for Tories - as we realised later there are such a thing as red Tories.

While many , myself included at the time air punched a Labour govt , it took a while to realise that the Tories simply took it over – the party had become one of champagne socialism, of millionaires telling us Scots we're simply arent socialists if that means by rejecting them.

Thats why today I can say this, I will once again vote for a Socialist Scottish Labour WHEN there is indeed a Scottish Labour to vote for.

As long as Scotland remains in a democratic sham, within a biased union, only to be heard when it agrees with England, then there never will be a Scottish Labour to vote for – only a regional office denigrating Scotland while it asks for its votes to lend a hand and reject what England has elected.

Democracy 2.0 is democracy devolved, democracy devolved is local democracy , local democracy devolved is....

Propositions

I have been meaning to write this piece for a while , in between bouts of ill health and of course twitter sessions , so lets get going.

Propositions , a term most political activists in the indy and socialist sphere well its something they arent really aware of – though they should be. It needs to be in the constitutional toolbox for post YES.

Basically you can think of it as micro referendums , devolving some decision making to the local level, but also at the national level, setting mandates to whoever is your representative – even if you choose someone else. There is no way of avoiding or stalling the electorate after the result , unlike manifestos.

The benefits are numerous but heres a few.

1.Better representation.

2.Prevents partisan policy.

3.Time frames the delivery of the proposition mandate , preventing bribery politics.

The end goal of political change via PROPS is to prevent party politics BLOCKING (for the sake of blocking) what is in effect good policies . Whether they are in majority or not the WHOLE house have been given a peoples mandate – and a time frame to supply.

The method of use.

Ideally you want staggered elections , 2 years between the Holyrood and council. Omitting EU elections for the moment , but it can also be used regardless for EU decision making, brexit of course being the reason for leaving it out in this example.

Westminster.

Holyrood

Council

So thats 3 elections , three ballots (for now), and lets say 1-3 propositions per ballot.

You could either have just props focusing on that election , ie local means local , national means national etc , but for this model its 1 for each criteria set within a theorhetical council election – setting Westminster , Holyrood and Council mandates.

OF course you will get the argument that 3 is too much , but is it really? Two more seconds ticking a box is hardly a big deal , especially if one or all of those props are important to you enough to GET AFF YER ERSE and vote – which also aids in reducing voter apathy as a byproduct.

Lets say the next election is council and you then have your preferential votes decided for a candidate already , I know dont get me started on preference voting , but bear with me.

So on the same ballot you have 3 propostions. 1 is related to Westminster , 2 Holyrood , 3 Council.

Those 3 Props are but YES/NO questions at each election.

1.Westminster mandate.

2.Holyrood Mandate.

3.Council Mandate.

NB Variant on a theme.

While the above suggests a YES/NO option , it can be changed further using a preferential system , say on budget spending – prioritizing it.

Though with that comes perhaps affluent GEO or demographic bias , but also as I mentioned the increase of voting intent via making the electorate get up and vote in something they feel strongly enough about – say the loss of a library , school , or care provisioning in theory would balance it out.

SO how do we define the question on the ballot?

In todays digital age its never been more simpler to create the likes of online polls , or e-petitions.

Even Westminster govt is already using something like it , but with only the option to debate in chambers , which it has denied on occasion. Again its the illusion of democracy though faux empowerment , PROPS can change that from an illusion into proper people power instead.

What I suggest is using similar to that Westminster uses to create the PROP , using the internet, plus of course automated telephone using NINO as identity checks for those without internet where they can do it analog. But REMEMBER unlike the Westminster system its not JUST for debate , but creating a mandate for govt instead to act on.

What kinds of questions could result for the ballots?

Lets say that e-petition no1 , the local council question , is for PROPOSING that all council vans are painted yellow.

So that gets added to the ballot, if the majority votes yes then council regardless of whatever party is in control has to then paint its vans yellow in that council, but if another council's ballot says no – then that council wont. Simple Local Empowerment delivered.

Lets say e-petition no2 , the Westminster question , is for something a little more radical like getting shot of trident , then this wont be a localised ballot result but a national one.

Even though this is a RESERVED matter , if the majority of the people have voted YES – its sent to Westminster to get it out of Scotland regardless of whatever party is in control and IS now the responsibility of the Scottish Secretary to fulfill it.

Lets say e-petition no3 , the Holyrood mandate is a housing reform question. Like say changing housing supply to my "marrow" system in my previous blog and gets a yes vote – then regardless of whatever party is in control its installed as national policy framework.

This is in my opinion the next step in Scottish democracy , beyond D'HONDT and proportional representation , where ALL parties cannot avoid the electorates mandate , nor its Local , National and Westminster Govt prevented.

Final thought.

The tables can be turned on the two party system , on career politicians , and party politics - and to steal a motto from the brexit referendum it is the ONLY real effective means of "taking back control".

Hope you enjoyed reading it , next up is a Scottish Constitution