Y Repwblic
Conversations with Wales' Republicans : Poblachiaethwyr - Repwbligwyr - Gweriniaethwyr

Declining Democracy by Refusing Registration ?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Y Repwblic Forum Index -> Ymgyrchoedd - Campaigns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I missed this - I have not been for a couple of years -

https://www.meetup.com/Cardiff-Philosophy-and-Question-Everything-Meetup/

- real world and social issues discussing : anything in the news and especially NOT in the news.
- Philosophy debating: focusing not just on facts but on ideas and ideals, such as what is freedom, identity or free speech, are we ever happy?
- Sharing intellectual resources such as books and films' names and themes or philosophers' works (lectures, conferences, magazine articles).

Everybody is welcome.
Our rule is to accept other people's opinions or ideas as they are and have respect for everybody. You don't need to be a very active participant, sometimes simply listening is all we want to do.

https://www.meetup.com/Cardiff-Philosophy-and-Question-Everything-Meetup/events/242791403/

The Achilles heel of democracy
September 5 · 7:00 PM
MISSOULA BAR
Come 6:50pm - starting 7pm prompt. We'll be upstairs, ask at the bar if lost.

For me the Achilles heel of democracy is what is popular wins, when what’s popular isn't always what’s right or needed. With the democratisation of information via technology, is this Achilles heel being exacerbated ?

Topic Thoughts:

A single emotional tweet from an unaccountable, anonymous person somewhere on the planet can catch fire and spread to millions almost immediately. This can then effect major political decisions as a result of voters not bothering to do the work of knowing the facts. The line of least resistance being emotionally led decision making rather than rational and factual, because emotion needs far less work than digging out all the data and making an informed, wise vote. So.. easy, dumb and popular then tends to get the winning vote, rather than informed and wise, which requires intellectual work. Democratic countries therefore eventually go bust as they become less wise and less mature, all as a consequence of spoiling themselves. Do you agree?

Are we becoming more emotional? Is this bad news for major political decisions? Is ‘Generation Snowflake’ a reality? Has Western civilisation - particularly the US and UK - spoiled itself? Is it dumbing down: ‘a race to the bottom’? Are we becoming weak? Can democracy fairly be blamed? It’s been said that all political systems are flawed and democracy is the least flawed. If you agree with this Achilles heel as I describe, can you think of ways to mitigate against this flaw? Socrates implied that the very nature of democracy makes it a corrupt political system. In his cross examination of Meletus he insisted that ‘only a few people can acquire the knowledge necessary for improving the young of any species, and that the many will inevitably do a poor job. He criticised the Assembly for its illegal actions and the Athenian courts for the ease with which matters of justice were distorted by emotional pleading.’ Can the present far left be accused of 'emotional pleading' and 'virtue signalling' which distorts justice?

If technology is exacerbating this flaw of democracy - i.e. what is popular wins when what's popular isn’t always what's right or needed and social media, allowing any unaccountable person to easily spread information, in turn encouraging emotional voting - then can technology also be the saviour and mitigate against this flaw? If not what are the alternatives to stop us sliding ever further down, when all the other political systems are worse? Other than arguably fragile benign dictatorship, which requires a fine balance to succeed and which easily fails as a result of the corrupting influence of power. Could AI become a successful benign dictator, if the human weakness for power were removed, potentially playing out in a global form of the speculated ’Resource Based Economy’?

Topic idea from James, written by James
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It occurs to me that this issue of Consent to be Governed etc carries all the way back.to the issues around The Star Chamber and The Petition of Right - the first part of a nice doc about this -

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rK1P6CPT4bg

The Strange Case of the Law, episode 2 of 3, The Pursuit of Liberty. [ BBC tv ]

About 46 mins in is the famous case of Penn and Meade where the jury acquitted them and the judge jailed the jury. Ends with a speech about how arbitrary action by judges or The State is forgotten in The UK and there is no active usage of habeus corpus etc - well I disagree and the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 is in my opinion a most dangerous example of it. Think of all of these people making a fuss about Google etc harvesting their personal data when they volunteer i.e. consent to have this done ( albeit there is virtually no real consent involved because there are few alternatives.) Google are not stealing your name and subscribing it to their services and making money out of your data without your permission - and they do not deliberately harm your credit rating if you refuse to sign your name to them and they will not harass you or fine you or imprison you for refusing to consent to endorse the fact that they have stolen your name and data and sold it for a steady profit without your permission.

( PRESENTER HARRY POTTER )

http://www.25bedfordrow.com/site/people/profile/harry.potter

[ LOTS OF WEBPAGES ETC ON THIS PENN-MEAD-BUSHELL TRIAL ]

http://www.constitution.org/trials/penn/penn-mead.htm

PDF ( I can not locate the web address.)

Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice
Volume 4 | Issue 1 Article 15
1986
Jurors v. Judges in Later Stuart England: The Penn/
Mead Trial and Bushell's Case
John A. Phillips
Thomas C. Thompson

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushel%27s_Case

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventicle_Act_1664


Last edited by dai on Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:58 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Demockerats said " Let us coerce their consent -_The People we have miseducated and their sense of politics bent :_They do not know now why they are upset_So they will accept that they are always distressed - yet_They keep on protesting as they vote about whom we truly represent ... "

The Demockerats said " Let us coerce their consent -_
The People we have miseducated and their sense of politics bent :_
They do not know now why they are upset_
So they will accept that they are always distressed - yet_
So they will always accept that they are distressed - yet_
They will keep on protesting - as they are voting - about whom we truly represent ... "

dai repwblic = Dai Saw = David B Lawrence : the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright ?

___________

Asamux responded & I replied -

Without voting there is no democracy. What would you replace democracy with?

Democracy is not about voting - it means " The Power is in The People " ( a translation which helps the sense of ) " The Power is in The Law " = " Nomocracy " \\\ Democracy can be carried out by choosing a number of people to act on behalf of others as in a jury : Nomocracy can be carried out by choosing people who from experience or education possess facts and arguments pertinent to the political decision to be made - but they can not establish themselves as a permanent political power - the Nomocrats are like The Civil Service - akin to The King on a chess board they decide the game but can barely move - they can declare legislation/policy lawful/not lawful but not make any themselves - except that they can determine cases of law by citing precedent

Choosing? How do you choose without voting ffs?

Same way that you choose a plumber - or rather a panel of plumbers who all understand the job but have different opinions about it how to do it : substitute the words " panel of poor people " to stop those who do not understand our lives from opinionating and legislating and making policies that harm us.

So you are in favour of a meritocracy?

Nomocracy places " The Power in The Law " which is nobody's individual private possession so no sectarian private interest can seize control of The State - which can result in Democracy and Meritocracy - you do not need to have great merit in a Nomocracy : it is like being called as a a witness in court.

So what's the point of trusting the people who are called to know anything? Or to be able to do anything? It sounds like picking a name out of the phone book when you need a doctor. ... So not Do.

No : the point is to protect The State from The Ultraists trying to take control of it & to protect The People from The State & keep it as [ THEIR] servant not [ THEIR ]master.

What's an Ultraist for goodness sake?

The Law is our description of - but not literally - De Res Publica & therefore The Law and the political system which creates it is literally The Public Good = The Law is a description of human relationships : which we will leave alone or promote and those which we will not = The Law is about The Other and " Other-ism " is called " Altruism " which is universalist and thus includes all within its boundary = " Ultra-ism " means " Beyond The Boundary-Ism."

[ Post-Script - an Ultraist does not escape from the boundary of society but de facto draws a boundary around himself and places others beyond it - therefore viewing others as prey : it is essentially a paranoid and hostile view of others and therefore anti-Altruist.]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For some reason two versions of this refused to send so I will just post the text here then watch the third episode -

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zfHoJIvy40s

Dear Harry Potter,

I am hoping that this may amuse you for five minutes : I am having to rethink my being prosecuted to make an important political point.

I do not expect you to reply but given your historical knowledge I wonder if you see the dangers in the Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 registering names without the owners' consents : I think that potentially it could destroy civil law entirely since it mostly rests upon contract - I started out by worrying about the basis of politics resting upon consent and that stuffing the registers with names as a means to maintain the impression that those persons agree with the political system which it represents is very dangerous.

Due to my personal experiences and my readings in Republicanism the Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 licencing the theft of my name by those who have ruined my life to subscribe it to my own destruction at the hands of their political system was too much : I finally rejected Democracy in favour of Nomocracy and started refusing to tick the box which demanded my consent to my own oppression.

In my opinion The Electoral Register is not a laundry list to cram with any names which can be found - it is of crucial importance that it is not constructed in an arbitrary way because this is the only place in which we can discern whether the political system has substantial support : if there is no opportunity to say " no " then " yes " does not exist - and what we are giving consent to is The Social Contract.

I think that The Democrats rest too easy upon their orthodoxy that to disagree with Democracy is mad, bad or - at least in my case - sad : it now turns out that " Democratic " is now to be classed with " O-M-G " and " incredible " etc as words now reduced in speech to meaningless identity markers - shiboleths which are harmless until refusing to say them results in harassment, fines and imprisonment as promised by The Democrats to those who disagree with their self-proclaimed right to prosecute their critics.

But to the best of my knowledge nobody has yet been prosecuted - neither tens of millions of potential electors nor thousands of electoral registration officers - yet millions of names are acknowledged to not be on The Electoral Register and tens of millions that are have not been confirmed are admitted to include electors who are absent, dead or not qualified.

It is a farce to witness the letters threatening the Civil Penalty pile up over the years - but a dark farce : this is not just mad legislation, bad politics and a sad waste of public funds but a squandered opportunity to do good legislation, wise politics and to use public funds to a beneficial end by testing whether The Social Contract holds.

In many constituencies if we counted every vote cast for every candidate and compared it to The Electoral Register then The United Kingdom would lose at every election : O-M-G - The " Democratic " Mandate is incredible and some naive infant is needed to step forwards to declare that not only do The Democrats in Westminster have no clothes - they do not even know the meaning of the word " Demockery."

David B Lawrence

recent post -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=5871#5871
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

UNA Temple of Health & Peace 7pm Wednesday 4th October - Jessica Blair Electoral Reform Society - David Melding AM - Dawn Bowden AM - Fair Vottes.& ER ?

There are of course few opportunities to carry these arguments into The Public Discourse but here was one where I took the opportunity. Jessica Blair of the Electoral Reform Society and many in the audience were putting fairly commonplace arguments about Proportional Representation and Single Transferable Votes but these of course are not going to improve our political system because they just carve up the bids for power over it in different ways and do not result in significantly more facts and arguments getting into it i.e. The United Kingdom as a non-political system is built to reject the information which characterises a political system as a decision making process which is why so many things are going wrong with it.

Dawn Bowden AM was proud to tell us about how she was selected to be a candidate for The Labour & Cooperative Party by a system of STV but she did not think that there was any call for electoral reform from the electorate and went on to praise herself in her constituency work in comparison to AMs who are elected on the regional list : I have also in the past suggested that STV elected representatives maintaining a strong link between specific areas and the higher tiers of elected government is desirable on the basis that those elected can work closely with and represent their local authorities to central government - but - we also need representatives elected by Proportional Representation on a national list in order to reflect the proportions of national political sentiment - and anyway neither of these will deal with the central defect of our non-political system The United Kingdom because either method is a version of Democracy and therefore neither remedy its defects.

David Melding AM thinks that there is a reason for electoral reform but whilst his proposals for such things as a jury of experts to meet to take specific decisions which they are informed about - and a sort of civilian national service in which people are randomly selected to provide a leaven in the non-political system - nothing that he suggested had a purposeful principle behind it i.e. to collect the facts and arguments that are necessary for making political decisions. Nevertheless I found myself once more preferring the opinions of somebody from The Conservative & Unionist Party and he was freely admitting that there is something wrong with The United Kingdom and he agreed with me that there has been a fundamental failure of trust although his perception of it is different from mine : he was quite alarmed by what I had to say and categorised me as an Anarchist ...

... What did I say ? ... Well I had to say something about my point of view before I asked my question about The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 ... I recounted some of my arguments about how in many constituencies if all of the votes cast were added up the Democratic parties are unable to obtain 50% of the registered votes and therefore their claim to a " Democratic Mandate " are invalid ... I recounted how they tried to substitute The Electoral Register as the basis for a mandate only to find that it is seriously depleted and no basis for claiming that their non-political system The United Kingdom is being endorsed or consented to ... I pointed out how The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 is filling up The Electoral Register by stealing names and is thereby discredited by being packed with names that include those of dead, absent, unqualified and even imaginary names which might as well be taken from off a cornflakes packet ... I failed to point out that millions of names of qualified voters are not on The Electoral Register yet The Electoral Registration Officers are not fined ...

... And then I finally got to the point about how The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 is yet another version of those laws which over the past five centuries have regularly been on and then off The Statute Book having been demonstrated to have been bad, offensive and impractical : harassments, fines and imprisonments for those who disagree with the official ideologies of those who control the state ... I should of course have mentioned that The Democrats themselves were once proscribed but I only mentioned those fined for not going to church, for holding different beliefs, for publishing criticism of The United Kingdom ... I should have played upon the irony that in Monmouthshire in the 1830s my ancestors were risking going to prison for campaigning for The Right to Register to Vote and now I am risking going to prison for campaigning for The Right NOT to Register to Vote ... All three speakers denied that I am facing harassment, prosecution, fines or imprisonment because my point of view differs from theirs : but this is not the case according to The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 - and given the pile of yellow letters that I have received then Cardiff City County Council are promising to prosecute me ... some time.

So much for the word " Democracy " when it is merely a shibboleth used of the old corrupt non-political system which is paradoxically called The United Kingdom by its supporters whilst they continue to tear our society apart decade by decade : they are concerned only for the appearance of the unity of their incoherent non-political system due to its non-constitutional basis which supposedly smooths over their paradoxical self-contradictions ... But the purpose of a political system is to serve a society - not to destroy it ... When The People are considered to exist for the purposes of The State then everything is upside down : when The State prosecutes those who merely criticise it then make inquiries as to whom The State serves and question the roles of those who control it and ask whom they serve - that they pretend to serve The People and yet make laws for harassing, prosecuting, fining and imprisoning those who question whether they are not serving themselves or some others ... In terms of political theory The United Kingdom can never be Democratic because of Parliamentary Sovereignty : voting is not Democracy.

... If you can not accept my political beliefs that have led me to refuse to even register to vote consider the proportionality of harassing, prosecuting, fining and imprisoning anybody for an act which in material terms is trivial. To the best of my knowledge nobody has yet been prosecuted under The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 - yet ... Therefore we might suspect that Common Sense is prevailing against Parliamentary Statute : local authorities have better things to do with their lack of money ... but ... there is always the possibility that somebody will take it into their head to repeat what happened with " The Poll Tax " and stage another series of Soviet-style " telephone book " trials as happened in 1991-2 when we stood in court watching the horror unfold when they literally announced " Are there any defendants here whose surnames begin with A ? ... No ? ... Everyone with surnames beginning with A are found guilty." It ought to have been recorded in the Guiness Book of Records : only under The English Law have trials ever lasted for less than half a second ...

... Except mine : I had paid what I owed and protested that I had and demanded a proper trial - and the response of the three magistrates ? They denied me trial and found me guilty - then I appealed to The Clerk of Court who explained to them that they could not do this : I had prepared my case and Cardiff City Council had not and they made a tremendous fuss and asked for Sine Die claiming that they would sort it out with me outside which seemed reasonable enough to a reasonable man so I agreed ... as did the magistrates who had thousands of people to summarily convict before their lunchtime ... What we agreed was that when The Inland Revenue had agreed my accounts they would abide by them ... then they rang up The Inland Revenue and denounced me as a cheat - that I could not possibly be that poor ... The Inland Revenue called me to a tribunal and agreed that I was indeed so poor that they wrote off all claims against me ... so I returned to Cardiff City Council and they sniggered and said that I was out of time after twelve months and took me to court and made me pay four times as much ...

... I have been in court rooms suffering at the hands of The English Law several times and whilst I have submitted to The Rule of Law I have not seen much justice : in three instances the judges involved almost cowered with embarrassment as if they wanted the bench to swallow them up they were so ashamed of what The English Law was compelling them to do to me ... it is a rare occasion when The People in Poverty get justice in The United Kingdom. ... Therefore I do not think that high-minded principles are a good platform to stand upon before The English Law : they do not win court cases, especially where the paradoxical self-contradictory laws made according to the catch-all defence of Parliamentary Sovereignty are concerned ... On the other hand there are occasions when highly-emotional flaws drive us to acts of defiance which may lead us to endure harassment, prosecution, fines and imprisonment for the sake of principles which are inseparable from our sense of ourselves and which drive us to confront bad laws in order to uphold good laws. This is not law-breaking in the conventional sense of being a secretive act of self-interest but rather law-making in the unconventional sense of being an openly conducted act on behalf of The Public Interest : martyrdom.

[ WELL I AM NEVER GOING TO QUALIFY AS A SAINT ]

[ I LATER WROTE A EMAIL TO DAVID MELDING ABOUT THIS AND ABOUT A PRIVATE POLITICAL PROBLEM ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Waking at 02.00 am laying on bed where I collapsed in clothes hours ago and what comes to mind is connected with another issue only obliquely referred to on the board because it is personal : that what is at stake here is respect - that we are being treated as slaves and thus forbidden the simple dignity of being able to say " NO." Only a slave can not refuse their consent to those who own them - and the evidence that we are slaves is " Parliamentary Sovereignty " which demonstrates that The United Kingdom treats us as property and thus is not a Democracy which demands The Sovereignty of The People ... that in itself demands that the minority are the property and therefore slaves of the majority - unless the minority are restrained by a Constitution which guarantees the rights of individuals against abuses of The State i.e. Sovereignty is as it always is - whether it is used as an excuse for kings or prime ministers - the non-principle which excuses arbitrary action and indemnifies it against any accountability before The Law.

It is The Law itself which supposedly creates Sovereignty and that is a nonsense - that anybody can pass a law which declares them not to be accountable to The Rule of Law - and therefore the only safe course of action is either to declare that The Sovereignty is in The Law or that indeed that the idea of Sovereignty is not compatible with The Rule of Law : there is only The Law and The Will of The People to enforce The Law - the legitimacy of The State is only determined by the justice which it produces and it can not be pleaded by those who act upon others that they are indemnified to perpetrate injustice because they act on behalf of The State because this is an authority argued upon an arbitrary legalism. If a " law " is unjust then it it is not a law at all because its application contradicts the purpose of why laws are made i.e. to produce justice : it is a citizen's duty to act in The Public Interest and oppose and indeed defy unjust laws because they will destroy De Res Publica - and the argument is best made by demonstrating that older and established laws of proven justice are being contradicted by newly introduced laws that are unjust.

Perhaps I should write to Theresa May about this point of view whilst she is still Prime Minister because she herself has very prominently been involved in legislating against slavery ...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Slavery_Act_2015
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The above was written in what turned out to be a horrible night of little sleep : if the reader does not already think me mad let me assure you that insanity not only runs in my family but hops, skips and jumps too and in 2016 crazed by her Marxist-Feminist rhetoric Lil'Sis took it into her head to remember my mother's family's history with the Czars but got it all wrong as usual and drew the conclusion that she ought to copy Stalin and put me on trial and ... Anyhow I had a wierd sort of nervous breakdown in which I carried on functioning normally as far as everybody else was concerned but went to pieces inside and so I nearly failed to show up in court. Unfortunately this sort of behaviour ecists in the Welsh side of the family too where people are equally passionately righteous about their opinions - so you will understand that I have to question my own behaviour - especially when I am courting the courtroom.

What has occurred to me this morning is the family history in Monmouthshire when the Lawrences were passionately committed to getting not only themselves but their neighbours onto The Electoral Register. They did not own much land to work but instead rented fields all over the place and collectively worked them as an extended family : the commonplace thing back then in the 1830s was for a middle class person to save up to buy a field here and there as a sort of old age pension fund built upon rents. The landless poor were either labourers or if they had a bit more cash to buy a horse and tools they became tenant farmers e.g. my family at the time worked out of Great House Undy ( the big white farmhouse next to the South Wales Railway ) yet they never owned it : they just had a big operation and many labourers besides those in the family so ...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_the_United_Kingdom

... Imagine how they felt when The Census came around : here were they working their socks off for a pittance whilst being in command of the use of so much property whilst owning none of it and therefore not having a vote. It was the fifth census in 1841 and the government was taking down everybody's names - especially noting the labouring men's names because the original census in 1801 was mostly about judging the balance between the production of food and the recruitment of soldiers to fight Napoleon - but those names were only being taken down for the purposes of The Aristocracy who not only owned the government but used it to raise taxes on labouring men to subsidise the rents that The Aristocracy collected from them : cheaper corn was available from The USA which could offer cheaper bread to those without land but this corn was taxed so that the fields continued to yield rents.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_Laws

You can immediately catch the sense of disaffection that the government can go to all of the expense of not only collecting your name for the census but a lot of other rather personal indeed what ought to be private information about you and thus putting your name upon an elaborate list for their own purposes - i.e. treating you like stock on their farm - and yet they will not put your name upon The Electoral Register - i.e. treating you like an animal not a man. Now add to this La Charte : at the end of The Napoleonic War the deal made after Waterloo was that The King in France would be restored to the throne in the constitutional monarchical arrangement agreed in 1792 - in which The People in Property in France had the vote i.e. The UK in the 1830 was guaranteeing - with the promise of military force - a Democratic arrangement in France which The Aristocracy in Britain and Ireland were refusing to The People in Property in The UK where getting to own property was particularly difficult in agricultural communities and nearly impossible in the new industrial communities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_1814

When " The Six Points " were draughted in the 1830s the proposal to call them " The Charter " caused a lot of consternation because it obviously referred to The Revolution in France in 1830 which replaced one branch of The Monarchy in France which had infringed La Charte with another. Some reformists refused to use the term Chartist and called themselves Suffragists but had exactly the same programme because they feared that the others intended to have an insurrection if they did not succeed by peaceful petition - and indeed this happened several times but failed each time, most notably in 1839. The Charter has its origins in 17c arguments for Democracy and progress towards its implementation has been painfully slow: the provision for annual elections to ensure that Parliament is held accountable has still not been implemented.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartism

But The Chartists did not forsee the possibility that anybody would be prosecuted for disagreeing with them once Democracy of any sort had been achieved - they themselves had witnessed peaceable advocates for Democracy and other ideas being treated as criminals and would be horrified by the idea because they were proponents of conceptions of a pluralistic, tolerant and non-coercive public discourse e.g. the idea advocated by some of making it illegal not to vote would have been utterly obnoxious to The Chartists - and they would view the present situation created by The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 of any member of the electorate being criminalised for peaceably not subscribing to The United Kingdom as being akin to their own situation in the 1830s when they were trying to get onto The Electoral Register or indeed the 1790s when even speaking in private about political reform was deemed to be a crime.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1794_Treason_Trials
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just in case you wonder what politics is like without Democracy the answer is like politics : Democracy is not political i.e. it is only a method for our appointing representatives and it is a bad one and might be the worst. Once the representatives have been appointed by this non-political method they mostly either do not bother to turn up at all but collect their salaries [ = local councillors ] or turn up to collect their salaries and fiddle their expenses [ = MPs ] or turn up to fiddle their expenses and look for a salary [ = in The House of Lords ] ... But a surprising number of The Democrats in Wales and Westminster do indeed have a go at doing politics because unhappily they believe that being elected has somehow qualified them as a politician ...

... My own bugbear - mentioned here and there - is what I suspect is the legacy of The Irish in The People in Wales : how the immigrants relied heavily upon knowing a man who knew a man who ... Cardiff reeks of this " Gombeen " politics where individuals build up their power bases by keeping others enslaved by making them dependent upon themselves as the gatekeepers to others more powerful : it has actually been built into the procedures of the city council as if it is a good thing - it is not ... it leads to all sorts of problems for all sorts of reasons and it results in the councillor involved not being able to find the time and attention to do the job : the proper role of the councillor is to listen to what their constituent is saying and then direct them the right officer to say it to and if necessary assist them to say it better ...

... Politics is about mending human relationships not about the acquisition of power over others such as a Gombeen will use his election to such places as Tammany Hall for : this is why Equality features so highly in Republicanisms - it is not some future material aspiration but the necessary social relationship which is a precondition for good politics. Here in Butetown The Gombeens in The Council seem to be being replaced by councillors who are definitely not Irish - and I prefer to think that the reason why they think and act more like me is because they are Muslims i.e. Catholic Christianity is structured very much in the same way that I describe Gombeens acting whereas the imams in Islam are not so much the men who know a man who ...

... Anyhow - when somebody helps you achieve some political end and mend human relationships - do not forget to express your thanks to people who often do things as councillors without being thanked : your representatives are neither your masters nor your slaves but your equals - so treat them so whilst continually lecturing them about the defects of The United Kingdom and also trying to save their souls from the evil of Demoncratic Demockery ...

My thanks to Saeed Ebrahim_
For his attention to these matters grim_
Which have been nearly half improved_
With half the rubbish now removed_
But how can we keep this place more trim ?

Regards - " dai repwblic "

_________________________

Since I mentioned it above - I really ought to try observe the same principle with The Woman in The North ...

She struck me as if I were a harp : _
She knocked me flat then left me sharp_
She screwed me up and broke my frame_
And left me struggling with the blame_
When it was she who plucked my heart.

dai repwblic = Dai Saw = David B Lawrence : the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From: David B Lawrence
Sent: 16 October 2017 21:41
To: Melding, David (Aelod Cynulliad | Assembly Member)
Subject: Re: I want to talk to you about this and other things.

David Melding AM, National Assembly for Wales, Butetown, Cardiff CF99 1NA

Dear David Melding AM,

I skimmed your article - I enjoyed reading all 51 pages but rapidly - and I paused in the middle to write the following - pungent ?

Is your article published on-line that I can direct other people to it ( I had a brief look for it ) or can I forward it to my friends ?

[ referring to - " A SURVEY OF POLITICS IN WALES - By David Melding AM " ]

I am very pleased about your comment about the right to withdraw from participation in Democracy but I actually want more.

I think The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 is potentially dangerous to established laws - even if not enforced.

I joke about there being a need for a register for those who do not want to be on The Electoral Register - and I absolutely mean it.

The Electoral Register is the only place where a person can peaceably register their not consenting to the (non-) political system.

Anybody concerned with the health of any political system should be concerned to know the level of consent that it is receiving.

You were The Presiding Officer in The Welsh Assembly but you probably did not see my poetic contributions after that incident -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?t=1278&highlight=rosemary+butler

The Welsh Assembly in Rosie's school_
Is often rowdy as a rule_
At the front there's Carwyn - who keeps on chattering -_
Both of Kirsty's hands are up - & Leanne is quietly battering_
Away at her maths homework - whilst R T is just playing the fool !

Rosie is not just her name - for she also has a rosey face -_
& whilst she's banging on her desk she's thinking of " The Mace "_
As a means to bring to order this class of infantiles_
But in order for her to do this she will need a lot of vials_
Whereas switching off their microphones - " That'll put them in their place ! "

I hope that you can take such satirical contributions as humorous - Radio 4 can be far nastier - but they did publish one of mine.

Just a final note : I am better educated than most but my writing is mostly a repetitive rigmarole to hammer home " The Model."

" The Model " is an ongoing debate with one particular friend Dafydd - he plays " Cranky Commie " versus my " Loony Liberal."

You presumably know the diagram " X = Left v Right " & " Y = Liberal v Authoritarian " - " Repwblicanwyr " are " Lefty Liberalish."

" The Model " is Liberty - " Anarchist v Conservative " & Egality - " Socialism v Fascism " & Fraternity - " Communism v Liberalism."

" The Model " began in the 1980s when we began to debate how and why the main political parties were shifting their positions.

We view Democratic parties in FTFP as being driven by the need to drop their ideologies in order to build large coalitions to win.

" The Model " describes eight coalitions - four being stable e.g. " Liberal Socialist Conservative " = The Labour & Cooperative Party.

Besides this there is an argument in " The Model " about " stasis v antistasis " i.e. four coalitions are unstable and " revolutionary."

I chose the word " Repwblicanwyr " because it came into Welsh c1810 with connotations of " wildly impractical political lunatics."

Actually we have our serious side and are variously involved but " Y Repwblic " has basically failed and is now a place to sound off.

" Y Repwblic " was intended as a place for the timid to find out about real Republicanism in Wales : our audience is in Russia - ???

Yours Sincerely

David B. Lawrence

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=5925#5925
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It turns out that a friend of mine also has a pile of those yellow letters which demand our consent to our names being stolen from us. He also has a different issue which is not being forced to make an incoherent squiggle across the screens of the gadgets being carried by those who deliver parcels : since he can not sign his name coherently he wants to make a thumb print as his mark and has had terrific rows about this and he is also arguing that to digitalise his signature is to be able to reproduce it and abuse it - so again the issue is his control of his consent, of his name being his own property : that he is not the property of large corporations or The State.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=6001#6001

( in the " Homage to Catalonia " thread )

The Democrats in Spain's determination today to coerce The People in Catalonia into consenting to The Social Contract of The State in Spain is exactly the same issue that I am protesting about in " Declining Democracy by Refusing Registration " where I will not subscribe my name to the non-political system of The United Kingdom because that is like having to kiss the sole of The Democrats' jackboot whilst they stamp on my face. Why on earth should I sign my name to my own destruction ? The Social Contract IS a contract and if our names are taken against our will then it is invalid : watch what will happen in Catalonia when they start to coerce people to submit to their rule - nothing much at first besides a few protests but gradually it will tear apart the whole of The People in Spain from The Government in Spain because whilst those effected may not be Catalan they will no longer able to trust The Democrats in Spain not to coerce them on behalf of The Aristocrats in Spain whom they actually serve. True it may not be imprisonment and massacres at first but that is where coercion will lead to : hence Democracy is not political - it is yet another form of Ultraism and the second step towards Monocracy of which Aristocracy is the third.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Given that I had a very disconcerting and expensive experience in a court room in December 2016 I might put this one here in dismal apprehension of what may happen -
Here is the gist of the English Law_If you are a victim then you can be sure_That justice you just will not get_In fact you can almost always bet_That you will draw the losing straw.

Here is the gist of the English Law_
If you are a victim then you can be sure_
That justice you just will not get_
In fact you can almost always bet_
That you will draw the losing straw.

dai repwblic = Dai Saw = David B Lawrence : the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Copulation without consent_Is something which we all resent_Governments should not escape_This metaphor concerning rape_When they criminalise peaceful dissent.

Copulation without consent_
Is something which we all resent_
Governments should not escape_
This metaphor concerning rape_
When they criminalise peaceful dissent.

dai repwblic = Dai Saw = David B Lawrence : the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Watching a BBC 4 programme on Athens which is praising it as the original home of Democracy - doubtful - with Boris Johnson declaring how The United Kingdom is a bastion of all of these values attributed to Ancient Athens - more than doubtful : he praised Britain as defending " Freedom of Association " which given our laws is more available to various sexual deviants rather than to any group of people organised out of concern for others which any Rational and Reasonable Government would promote not suppress ... Anyhow the point that I have in mind about Freedom of Consent applies also to Freedom of Association : if the question does not have a choice between " Yes " and " No " then it is not a question but a coercive illusion e.g. Of course you will choose to join The XXXX Army " dai " because all good people are gun-toting patriots who want to kill jonny-foreigners ...

... No : The Freedom of Association also involves the Freedom of Dis-Association or it is not a " Freedom." ... And all I am asking for - and risking being prosecuted for - is The Freedom of to say " No " to " The Electoral Register " because of the way in which it is constructed because this has removed the validity of the Consent necessary for the healthy functioning of any sort of political system ... so - yes : I object to The United Kingdom because it is an anti-political system but it is necessary to take a stand for a functioning political system for the sake of our society i.e. to stop The United Kingdom getting any worse a few of us must end up being prepared to say " No " both for our own sake and the sake of others - to say " No " to any anti-political system in which saying " No " is made illegal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have I just woken up hearing that 40% of electoral registrations have been duplicated on different registers ?

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-reviews-and-research/uk-general-election-was-well-run,-but-electoral-system-faces-serious-risks

" ... The Commission also calls for the UK’s governments to make progress in implementing the important recommendations made by the UK’s Law Commissions in 2016 to reform and simplify our complex and fragmented framework of electoral law. ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you still believe in Democracy then at least read this - the criticism of Constitutionalism as not being an adequate defence against those who would seize power over The State is valid but the remedy is not more Democracy but Nomocracy i.e. that power over The State is in the hands of those who are given little scope for action by The Rule of Law ... I would not put my faith in the notion that the best defence is one of custom and culture because they are too mutable and often quickly so - as The Government in Russia has been demonstrating recently through the use of social media to manipulate The Democrats in The USA.

https://newrepublic.com/article/145916/democracy-dies-donald-trump-contempt-for-american-political-institutions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Y Repwblic Forum Index -> Ymgyrchoedd - Campaigns All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


© 2007-2008 Informe.com. Get Free Forum Hosting
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
 :: 
PurplePearl_C 1.02 Theme was programmed by DEVPPL JavaScript Forum
Images were made by DEVPPL Flash Games