Translate

Saturday, 27 November 2010

John Major is slowly coming round to the idea of a one-party state. Frank Field has already. It is called a National Government.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333561/John-Major-believes-Coalition-run-past-2015-poll.html?ITO=1490

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jan/22/frank-field-mandelson-clarke-cable

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=107
has a draft constitution for the incipient one-party state that should be the logical conclusion of these ideas.

It is tiresome how easily frightened so many British politicians are by these ideas.  Those who are frightened are reminded that Ancient Athens and Republican Rome from which the West draws its democratic traditions were in fact one-party states with shifting factions.  A party is administratively necessary to attract members, field candidates, change rules, count votes etc. 

It will not result in a totalitarian dictatorship if its constitution protects the rights of its members (the most important of which is free speech) against the leader and his cronies. 

China will show us the way.  Whatever you think of its human rights records, the average Chinese Communist Party member has more rights against his party than the average MP against his.  Check out their Article 4. 

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-10/25/content_6944738_1.htm

Also note that the Chinese Communist Party periodically revises its constitution to reflect changes in reality. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

Can we have a sensible discussion about this, please?

No comments:

Centuries of Christian on Christian violence and incoherence unchallenged by Jews and Muslims

Theology  https://t.co/biI496O9C1 — Cyborg of Secular Koranism (@Book_of_Rules)  November 17, 2024 4:00  CAROL joins. 5:00  Kawkab's Spa...