If more than half of the population does not vote, then no party gets into power. Anarchy.
If people knew anarchy would be the result of a low voting participation, they would vote almost to 100% participation rate, without making it mandatory to vote.
Local municipalities are much more important than general elections.
I don't want voting to be mandatory. That would mean I would have to vote for someone I don't want to see in power, or cancel my vote.
Problem is, even if more than 51% of people cancelled their vote under a 100% participation rate, the 2nd place would come into power, instead of putting no one in charge.
If 51% or more of people cancel their vote, it means that the majority want no government or don't want to see any of the candidates into power.
Democracy fails again.
In the future, with enough computers and Internet access we might one day see a system where any new law could be presented by anyone - online - and then approved by a referendum - online - without any political party actually being in power.
It would be complicated and a huge PITA to vote daily, but it could work under the right conditions.
You're absolutely right:
But:
Fundamental Freedoms
Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
----
Don't you see the slippery slop?
If government doesn't like a certain form of speech it's banned!
You're absolutely right:
But:
Fundamental Freedoms
Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
----
Don't you see the slippery slope?
If government doesn't like a certain form of speech it's banned!
You're absolutely right:
But:
Fundamental Freedoms
Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
----
Don't you see the slippery slop?
If government doesn't like a certain form of speech it's banned!
hey Consultant en informatique et neo-nazie...
Il est sur MR c'est certain
Cela étant dit l'affiche est haineuse en crisse. Si on faisait autant pour Jonathan Bettez on se ferait rabrouer manu-militari...
In the future, with enough computers and Internet access we might one day see a system where any new law could be presented by anyone - online - and then approved by a referendum - online - without any political party actually being in power.
It would be complicated and a huge PITA to vote daily, but it could work under the right conditions.
Il n'y a rien qui justifie qu'on permette à cette affiche de rester publier. C'est un catalyseur à générer du harcèlement et de la diffamation de façon inutile.
Ceux qui ont produit cette affiche méritent un ostie coup de pied au cul!
Il n'y a rien qui justifie qu'on permette à cette affiche de rester publier. C'est un catalyseur à générer du harcèlement et de la diffamation de façon inutile.
Ceux qui ont produit cette affiche méritent un ostie coup de pied au cul!
u mad?
Consequences of his actions. I you believe in freedom of speech, don't hide behind an alias.
If he believes what he preaches is right, why does he feel the need to hide?
I'm not saying it's "right". I am stating that a consequence of being a right wing celebrity is you will attract both supporters and haters, just like celebrities in Hollywood.
You cannot expect to reach this level of infamy, with such an inflammatory message, and not expect an outcome of this sort.