"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give the appearance of solidarity to pure wind" _ George Orwell.
We are in big trouble with politicians discarding the truth - AGAIN - in order to be re-elected. I'm outraged that we have to choose between Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd - the choices just seem to get worse and worse and worse as the elections roll by.
It took the ABC's Four Corners to prompt Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology for the deaths of people in the botched insulation program.
He actually met the parents Four Corners interviewed and didn't even offer condolences for the death of their son - that's what they told Four Corners. What kind of behaviour is this? I don't think Tony Abbott is better either. These "men" are not caring for their constituency they are caring about their personal/political goals. Wrong priorities.
Rudd apologised but significantly failed to release those letters Environment Minister Peter Garrett sent him during those months when bureaucrats, electricians and parents were trying to get the Rudd Government to provide life-saving checks and balances and training.
It's representative government - they represent us - do they represent our values? Do we get what we deserve?
I examined a slideshow about the results of a social media study conducted by InSite Consulting today. (released March 2010)
It shows social media as a pyramid of activity with content creators at the top and inactive users at the bottom.
The breakdown goes like this: 24 percent of social media users are content creators, 33 percent are conversationalists, 37 percent are critics, 20 percent are collectors, 59 percent are joiners, 70 percent are spectators (I guess most of us are spectators most of the time), and 17 percent are inactive.
If a democracy profile is similar to this break down with politicians at the top making laws, the conversationalists are people who bother to keep up with current affairs, the critics are the media, the joiners are sheep or maybe swinging voters and we're all spectators - perhaps this is why we're in trouble? I don't know what the overlap is in this study: I'm sure that some critics are conversationalists etc....
The point is that the people able to hold politicians and political parties (their interests are not necessarily the interests of the community) make up only half the population - if we're lucky.
Sure everyone over 18 votes in Australia - that may be one of the problems! Compulsory voting. If people don't care should they be forced to vote?
Participation is key - people need to care before politicians will give a damn. It only works when people are held accountable. It seems that what's more important to everyone is "what you can get away with".
We're in trouble. It is an "act of political cowardice" - to use the prime minister's words in regard to failing to do anything about climate change - to let THEM "get away with this".
Where does power reside in a democracy?
The slideshow:
<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEyNzI*NTAwMzY2NTUmcHQ9MTI3MjQ1MDA*NTUyOCZwPTEwMTkxJmQ9c3NfZW1iZWQmZz*yJm89OTNlNWM3MzIwY2Nm/NGNmZGIyYmI1NmE2NzM4YTUwMWImb2Y9MA==.gif" /><div style="width:425px" id="__ss_3435531"><strong style="display:block;margin:12px 0 4px">Social networks around the world 2010</strong><div style="padding:5px 0 12px">View more presentations from stevenvanbelleghem.</div></div>