• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

[National] Federal Election - 21st August 2010

28262-VoteOrDie.jpg
 
I think I'm on team Julia, but yet to be confirmed.

Altho according to Hack this afternoon, the Greens are looking pretty good. Well as good as the Greens can look.
 
I have no idea who to vote for... (in my opinion) neither side fulfills what I'm looking for, and they are both way to pre-occupied with image, sacrificing important (although prehaps unpopular) policies for those which will get them votes. The problem with Australian politics is that there is not enough competition. You have Liberal and Labour... with Greens votes often going to either side, depending on the seat.

It's my first time voting this year... I hope I can decide before the date! :P haha
 
^ You mean 'Labor' right? :)

You could try looking at what deals minor parties have made with the major parties for preferences. At least that way there is a bit more meaning to your vote. Good to see you enrolled :)
 
If you want to vote for neither Liberal nor Labor but would prefer one won rather than the other remember to preference vote. It may take filling out 60+ boxes but it's not like you have to vote every week so suck it up. It also means your vote going where you want it rather than a minor party giving it away to the greater of the two evils (wherever that may lie for you), and it still means your favourite minor party could hold the balance of power.

Anyway, it just wouldn't be election time without me posting this so please consider:

A COMMENT ON RESPONSIBLE VOTING, AND A PROTOCOL FOR A USEFUL VOTE:

By Greg Graffin

Voting is a privilege. As such it requires responsibility. Irresponsibility when coupled with licence can lead to social tragedy. If one is to feel good about his or her vote, it is necessary to have an agenda to use as justification, and also to adhere to some sort of ideological protocol for casting a particular vote. Too often in the past, our generation has voted and formed opinion based on self-serving interests. I know what is good for me, and I don't really care about what is good for others, I will vote for the candidate or issue that benefits me the most is a common way of thinking. This is an example of the simplest possible voting convention. It doesn't require much worldly knowledge or social concern, it is simply a selfish desire for personal gain. This will probably typify most people's thinking on their way to the polls this year, as it has in years past. But it does not make for a better society. Voting offers us a way to responsibly improve society. If you don't care about such a goal, then voting isn't a privilege for you, its just a routine behavior that happens every four years, or worse, a way to implement evil policies that further degrade the lives of the careless and powerless. If you don't care about improvement, you better hope that those who do go to the polls advocate your interests.

Societal improvement is a somewhat nebulous concept because change is rarely teleological and it rests in the whims of the populace. Most people think that a candidate who wins an election can make the world a better place. This has rarely happened in history. It is the people, or the ruled, who make the world a better place by behavioral changes, and the ruler is usually only a by-product of this collective phenomenon. The process of voting, because it demands sharing of information, requires people to gain knowledge about their world. It offers an opportunity to question whether they accept the tenets of their representatives and of their society. When this occurs, people get informed, people can communicate their distastes, and their hopes. They feel useful and acknowledged by their fellow citizens. And through communication comes action, and eventual abatement of the stigmas that cause suffering and misery. An informed person is a content person. An informed society is a strong society, supportive of its citizens, aware of, and compassionate to those less advantaged. Finally, an informed vote is a responsible vote. It goes far beyond the election in question. The knowledge is carried through the life of the possessor, and it shapes the way that person views his/her position in society and communicates with others. All of this is a contribution to a better community and a more meaningful election.

AN UNORTHODOX PROTOCOL FOR CASTING A MEANINGFUL VOTE:

1. Determine whether you care about the general well-being of society (If you do not, skip to step 7, if you do, continue on)

2. Determine whether you are a privileged citizen (If you are not, then proceed to step number 6, if you are, read steps 3, 4, and 5 only)

3. Examine not how well you will fare if a given issue is voted into law, but how poorly the under-privileged will suffer (no matter which laws pass a vote or who is voted into office, you will probably always still be better off than the people you fear you'll become, namely the under-privileged).

4. Create an ideological balance-sheet that details how much better you will fare, as a percentage of your current comfort level, versus how much worse the under-privileged will drop in their current comfort level (for instance, as a very banal example, a mere 2% drop in your current income, could provide a tremendous relative rise in an under-privileged household's income).

5. Vote for the issue or candidate that promises to balance the disparity between the privileged and the under-privileged classes, even if it doesn't make you richer or if it provides a small compromise in your day-to-day comfort.

6. Vote for the issue or the candidate who will make your life better.

7. Abstain from voting

Finally, remember voting started out as a way for concerned citizens to play a role in creating a society that was good for all. Over time it evolved into the monstrosity it is today which is no more than a vehicle for selfish partisanism, and worse, a voice for those who want the law to preserve and increase the disparity between needy and privileged.

This unfortunate turn of events has made us a hostile, hopeless people. We should remember that history is relevant, and can help us gain a perspective on our current situation. NO civilization persists without a strong sense of social welfare. The British empire expired once its subjects learned that through unity and enlightenment of the underprivileged came a new power structure and a new sense of national community, one strong enough to turn away any possible oppressors. We are headed in the same direction as the failed British empire as our privileged class increases in wealth yet shrinks in population, and our underclass grows in population and shrinks in wealth.

Your vote is meaningless if it merely bolsters the selfish desires of a small privileged minority of citizens. A meaningful vote depends on the passage of issues or election of candidates that help to create a better scene for everyone, not merely the rich elite, and not merely provisional support for the poor. If you follow these guidelines, we will have a less polarized, more enthusiastic underclass, and a less greedy, more compassionate upper class; and the quality of our social fabric will be drastically enhanced.
 
Good luck finding a political party in this country that is going to tackle humanitarian issues that obviously but along the same agenda I always remind people that they should take advantage of the modern society and become pro-active in understanding the policy and agendas of each of the political parties.

Use Internet and read the sites sanctioned and created by the political groups themselves but most importantly the alternative news sources; the more the better. You also have local members and you should take the opportunity harass them with questions when ever you have the chance.
 
Haha, yeah, I realised after posting, but it didn't seem worth the hassle of pressing the edit button :P

I actually got a letter from our local Liberal member today, and he made some worthwhile points... but then again, it's all just fingerpointing and blaming Labor (got it right that time!). Seems like when it comes to economy, Liberal is the way to go.

Lostpunk^^ That's a great post... the only thing is how many people are that dedicated to ensuring they vote for the 'right' person.
Eggman^^ Agreed! They don't always reply though :S

Anyway, it's too late to be thinking about politics, I shall come back here in the morning :P
 
Last edited:
If voting actually changed anything it would be made illegal.


also thanks for that textLostpunk will use it to stir up friends' apathy.
 
Last edited:
I think I'm on team Julia, but yet to be confirmed.

Altho according to Hack this afternoon, the Greens are looking pretty good. Well as good as the Greens can look.

I believe the Greens are directing their votes to labor. I think that's how I'll vote.

Remember Jules is all for the internet filter. I'm not sure who isn't though :\
 
Oceanwho?

*pokes thread*

Meritocracy



- The Progeny of Democracy -


By: William Meader



Democracy is the fastest growing political system in the world today. When considering the last few decades, the spread of democratic values has been astounding. Throughout the world, people are rising to the note of freedom. Indeed, the yearning to participate in community and governmental decisions has reached an historical crescendo. The walls of totalitarian control are crumbling everywhere, and this, due to the “urge to be free” inherent in the human soul itself. The rise of democratic ideals is simply a part of the unfolding realization of humanity’s higher purpose and potential. When examining the long history of human evolution, democracy was destined to emerge. The evolution of the human spirit demanded it be so. Yet, from the ancient esoteric perspective, democracy is not the ideal form of social governance, but only a necessary stepping stone toward it. For in the distant future, the social system of meritocracy will supersede our prized democratic way of life. Indeed, it is an inescapable form of governance destined to be woven into the fabric of human living. The only uncertainty is the question of time.



Meritocracy is similar to democracy, but with an important addition. While it recognizes the value of full participation within society, it also advocates the importance of including meritorious hierarchy into the social and political landscape. It is a system that states that society should be structured around human ability rather than by wealth or aristocratic privilege. Upon close examination it can be seen that money and wrongful use of power has historically been the force that has defined the various hierarchies found within democratic societies. For example, people who wield tremendous financial resources are given undue leverage in shaping public policy in support of their personal interests. This has led to class distinction based upon wealth rather than on knowledge and character. A meritocracy eliminates this flaw as it now demonstrates within the democracies of today. In addition, it allows for an end to human distinctions based upon religious orientation or racial heritage. In a meritocratic system, a person’s ability (and willingness to apply it) is the cornerstone that defines his/her influence. And, to insure that the best attributes of an individual are brought forth, a meritocracy requires that all citizens be given the same educational opportunities.



At this point it should be noted that there are two philosophic orientations upon which a meritocracy can be based. The first (and most commonly considered) uses intellect and personality competence as the primary measure for determining one’s merit (and therefore social standing). This is essentially an ego driven form of meritocracy. It suggests that those who are most intelligent in their dealings have the right to stand with greater authority within society. In some sense, this view of meritocracy is rooted in the Darwinian model of evolution. It is to apply the motto of the “survival of the fittest” into a social and political context. This is meritocracy, but not the form that esotericism advocates.



An esoterically structured meritocracy utilizes spiritual values and wisdom as the measure of merit, rather than intellect and personality ambition. While it still supports the idea that social influence must be earned, wisdom, and one’s commitment to the Good, are the cornerstones that define an individual’s place and authority within society. At the same time, a spiritually defined meritocracy acknowledges that at the deepest level, all people are equal. Given this, such a society must demonstrate a profound respect for the unique qualities of every citizen. Yet it also recognizes that there are vast differences in people when it comes to spiritual maturity and the development of consciousness. When looked at in this way, it can be seen that human consciousness is hierarchical, as is everything else in nature. In other words, within any society will be found people at varying stages in the development of their consciousness (understood within a multiple incarnational perspective). As such, a meritocracy offers greater influence to those who have demonstrated the broadest and wisest consciousness in support of humanity’s betterment.



A major tenet of this form of meritocracy is that a society is a living system, and that all people within it need to find their rightful place within its strata. Importantly, the correct place also defines the functional contribution that a person can offer to society as a whole. In some sense, place and function are identical. In such a society, the greatest likelihood of happiness occurs when a person has found his/her rightful place within the larger living system, and this, based upon his/her demonstrated wisdom. Taken to its logical conclusion, when all people within a meritocratic system find their place, such a society would be nearly flawless. Crime would greatly diminish (if not completely cease), for crime is most often due to a misalignment of person with place, as well inequalities related to education and social opportunity. These inequalities and misplacements would be largely remedied within a wisdom-defined meritocracy. Undoubtedly, it is this that will eventually push humanity to meritocracy’s doorstep.



The definition of a meritocracy states that elevated influence within a social system is inversely related to personal interest. In other words, the wiser one is, the less attention s/he will pay to personal needs. The needs of the whole become the preoccupation of life. As one rises in influence within a spiritual meritocracy, he or she will demonstrate increasing degrees of personal sacrifice, for the whole is seen as all that is. Spiritual wisdom can only emerge when one is increasingly able to sense the fundamental oneness underlying human society. This inner sight is found in various degrees in the more enlightened of our human family. Unfortunately, it is not sensed by the many intelligent (though selfish) personalities that govern so much of the democratic processes today. Governance must be based upon an authentic vision of human unity. It is the gradual opening of the third eye (sometimes called the eye of vision) that makes such sight possible. When this is the case, decisions made will be guided by unitive vision, and will not be self-serving. This is foundational to the meritocracy of the future.



In a spiritually-defined meritocracy, equal education becomes far more central than it is today, for only in this way will the abilities of every citizen be recognized and brought forth. Education will also shift in such a way that all issues will be understood as relative and contextual. Society will come to understand that polarized views represent an expression of both truth and falsity, and can only be rightly understood within the context of the larger whole. It is from this more balanced perspective that wisdom will emerge, rather than the narrow and partisan perspectives so strongly favored today. The day will come when people will no longer say, “I have found the truth,” but instead say “I have found a truth.” In addition, religious differences will be honored rather than feared. Because education supports diversity, respect for differing religious views is heightened. As a meritocracy evolves, it will become increasingly evident to its citizenry that religious differences are largely a matter of birth and cultural upbringing, and that each religion has something to contribute to the good of the whole. From this understanding, the distinction between a meritocracy and theocracy becomes apparent. A theocracy is a social order governed by one particular religion. Its leaders are exponents of that religion and are relatively intolerant of contrary spiritual or secular views. However, a spiritual meritocracy is not religious. It holds the view that all avenues of human expression have the potential of being spiritual (something quite different from religious). In other words, spirituality is not exclusive to religion. Education, government, science and the arts (to name just a few of humanity’s modes of creative expression) are all products of human consciousness, and are therefore spiritual.



In many ways, meritocracy will emerge as humanity gradually rises above the problems inherent in democracy. One of the obvious difficulties found in democratic systems is that everyone is given equal vote even though most are not properly educated on the issues for which they cast their vote. In today’s democratic society, a well-informed voter is a rare thing indeed. And, because a democracy makes decisions based upon the majority opinion, it is the uninformed masses that are steering society’s course. This problem inherent in democracy has been acknowledged for centuries. Many of the great minds in history have expressed concern over this democratic shortcoming. Aristotle himself had grave reservations about democracy for similar reasons. However, much of this would be solved in a meritocratic system. Because equal education is its central function, a meritocracy would far better educate its citizenry on the nature of the issues at stake. All issues will be examined in a balanced way (because education will have encouraged balanced thought). As a result, people will be far less prone to decisions based upon partisan attitudes and thirty-second sound bytes.



In many ways, it was a meritocracy that Plato advocated in his most famous work, The Republic. He saw the dangers evident when people of power rise to positions of authority without the needs of the whole governing their motives. As a result, selfishly intelligent people make decisions that are contrary to the good of the whole, though usually personally beneficial. He believed that this is one of the greatest problems facing civilization and democracy. Plato was therefore convinced that society should be structured so that enlightened leadership will naturally emerge by drawing out the best qualities evident in everyone’s nature. For Plato, the merits that constitute enlightenment are not much different that what has been already discussed in this writing. He believed that wisdom, and an inclusive point of view, were essential. He felt that inclusive reason (a prerogative of the soul) must rise above one’s passions. In addition, virtue and impeccable character were qualities seen as indispensable. Interestingly, he also felt that those at the highest levels of governance should be without wealth or private property. Though this was to be legislatively mandated, people of such lofty levels of consciousness would normally find such renunciation to be quite natural. Quite the opposite of what we see in our Western democratic systems today. This was his solution to the subtle corrupting influence that power has over people. It involved a proven sacrificial element when serving society. And, from the esoteric perspective, sacrifice (rightly understood) is one of the strongest indicators that the soul is influencing a person’s life.



In this discussion, we have seen that a wisdom-defined meritocracy holds the promise of a much better and safer civilization. Over the last several decades, democracy has been spreading throughout the world, indicating that the desire for freedom and social participation is on the rise. This is certainly a positive development, and will lay the foundation for the emergence of meritocracy sometime in the future. As such, meritocracy is the progeny of democracy. Democracy is replacing the tyranny and totalitarian abuse that has controlled world affairs over the last several centuries. The establishment of freedom and democratic ideals is an essential prerequisite for a wisdom-defined meritocracy to come forth. In truth, the seeds of meritocracy are even now being planted within our society. Anti-discrimination legislation, efforts to widen educational opportunities for more people (who in the past had little chance of higher education), and the development of effective aptitude assessments, represent a few of the many seeds that support the emergence of meritocracy. Admittedly, much still needs to be done. Yet, we must always remember that understanding the evolution of civilization requires a long view. It is only when we look at the changing nature of culture and civilization over the course of many centuries that we see its progress. And, it is this same longer view (cast into the future) that is required in order to see the inevitability of a meritocratic world. The day will surely come, and each of us has the ability to till the soil in support of this promising future.

TLect.

PEACE
UnS
:)
 
The televised debate phenomenon is everything that is wrong about modern Australian politics. There is never a serious new initiative, enlightened opinion or fresh point of view. All you ever get is a condensed version of what the majority average voter wants to hear turned out five different ways.
 
I completely agree: they avoid difficult question with answers that mean nothing, and go on to attack each other without providing any real solution to a problem.

Even so, I really dislike the immigration policies, as well as both major party's attitude towards refugees. I think it reflects how xenophobic our society is, even though we have an extremely multi-cultural population... Anyway, just my opinion =)
 
Top