Previous  1  2  3

It would have to be something that be in a process of continuous review. We do that with elections already.

   

How you would define a "good leader" is different to how I would, but that's beside the point. I think the main problem you are trying to get at is the superficiality of politicians... pandering to public opinion, and not standing upon principle. You've indicated the reason yourself: determining merit is a difficult thing when choosing our public representatives. It is human nature to be drawn to the most charismatic image, with a polished message of things you want to believe are possible. Easy answers to difficult issues are popular, regardless of whether they are realistic.

The battleground is the media, in wars over image. Substance and merit rarely have a hearing in the court of public opinion because the media is interested in ratings, and controversy / superficiality sells product. I know more about Belinda's fashion sense than her political beliefs... how is that relevant to public service as an MP? What does Stephen Harper's hair have to do with leadership? Give me a break! News is becoming more about "infotainment" than actual reporting of substance. That's just the way the world works. Objectivity in journalism is basically an illusion... media is a business.

What's the answer? I don't know... but I do know that democracy is not the problem. Human nature is.

   

Human nature is always the problem.... as I said before, it's quite simple to change the process to remove the dependancy on those fallable characteristics. Democracy has as potential of disfunctionality just as communism does (albeit significantly less), but both look good 'on paper'.

   

You might be interested in News breakers then.

   

Communism doesn't even look good on paper because of one major flaw. The need for productivity is not accounted for. Under communism, the most productive get rewarded with more work with no fiscal benefits. That means that productivity is (in essence) punished. As an economic model, Communism just doesn't work.

As for it's political shortcomings, human nature would again cause problems... unchecked power over the masses by the political elite just screams an invitation for corruption.

   

Thanks for the link , but this looks more like the terrorism of journalists than factual reporting to me... plus it is not Canadian.

   

Testing signature

   

Striving for the votes of the generally uninvolved masses screams an invitation for lies and insincerity.

   

But at least you can kick the bums out after a few years if you don't like what they do...

   

Kinda like how McDonalds or Walmart hires anyone under the sun, and then just fires the ones that don't work out.

   

I don't get your point... Are you agreeing with me that democracy has this advantage over communism (accountability at the polls). Or are you saying that private businesses should be forced to employ people who don't do their job to the satisfaction of the employer?

   

Smell the freshness of equality and feel the reality of capitalism.

   

Previous  1  2  3