How Democrats Can Learn Populism

[crazy canuck]

Sounds like you're ready for the Chinese model minus the corruption. 

You are forgetting about the part where Albertans have free elections and do allow other parties to run.

[Oexmelin]

But more than that our politics are quite different.  If I am right you wish to see fairly quick fundamental change in our system and particularly your Province (Country) while I am a Conservative (in the political theory sense) in that I am suspicious of polticians who have the quick fix.

You are right that this might boil down to our fundamental political outlook, though I would say it has nothing to do with the horizon of my political agenda (which is not especially short-term) and everything to do with keeping popular input within. Having a managerial-type of government seems to me to be the best way to negate any sort of citizen input in favour of misleading false "pragmatism". In other words, people who can envision to do good under any system see no need to spend energy on actual politics. I believe in my political values, but I am wary of seeing them enshrined in a managerial system which would never be questioned, and for which the questions would be denied legitimacy. It leads to the worse aspects of bureaucratization (the means become the ends). People who can envision no change under any nominally "democratic" system leads to voter apathy and low participation scores. I don't see this as being especially desireable, unless you are a kind of 19th century / Hansmeister exploitative bourgeois or their mouthpiece who believes the common good is better served by keeping the unwashed masses out (though I know this is a common Languish trope).

[Razgovory]

Question:  Do you elect Judges in Canada?  There are many places where judges are elected in the US.  What about law enforcement?  Do you elect Sheriffs?

[Sheilbh]

Sounds like you're ready for the Chinese model minus the corruption. 

Quite

I agree with Oex.  I'd add that another problem is that you're basically saying that people who disagree with the managerial, pragmatic style of government are beyond what's acceptable.  Because government is run in a consensual, managerial way if you're disagreeing with that then you're clearly some sort of extremist who should be avoided or should just shut up and let the adults get on with governing.  I think it's precisely this sort of thinking and cosy, consensual politics that's affected European politics since the war and is to blame for the relative success and rise of the populist far right and far left.

[Oexmelin]

Yes, that is what I meant by saying questioning that model would be denied legitimacy.

[Sheilbh]

Question:  Do you elect Judges in Canada?  There are many places where judges are elected in the US.  What about law enforcement?  Do you elect Sheriffs?

I think only Americans elect judges and Sheriffs and the like.

We're moving to elected Police Commissioners here but, from what I understand, they won't have the final say and their role is very much to reflect citizen's concerns in general strategy (ie. we should focus more on bobbies on the beat) and not on operations.  The hope was lots of independents would run and win, but by the looks of it a few retired police officers are running and, aside from that, it's party figures.  But it's quite controversial because the independence of the police from politics is a strong principle in our police system.

I think overall I support the move though

[Valmy]

I think only Americans elect judges and Sheriffs and the like.

How many states actually do that though?

I know we do it but that is mostly a reflection of our wild wild west history.

[Razgovory]

Well I think that might be productive area to look into on this debate.  Areas that elect judges, sheriffs, prosecuting attorney's etc compared to those that don't.  At least in areas that are otherwise fairly comparable.  Such as different US states and the US and Canada.

[Sheilbh]

Apparently the Japanese and the Swiss also have an elected element in their judiciary.  I wouldn't trust anything the Swiss do

[Razgovory]

Languish Lawyers would be welcome here.  I don't pretend to understand law that well, but I imagine some American lawyers have worked with both the elected and unelected variety at some point, or at least have a vibe in the profession.

[crazy canuck]

But more than that our politics are quite different.  If I am right you wish to see fairly quick fundamental change in our system and particularly your Province (Country) while I am a Conservative (in the political theory sense) in that I am suspicious of polticians who have the quick fix.

You are right that this might boil down to our fundamental political outlook, though I would say it has nothing to do with the horizon of my political agenda (which is not especially short-term) and everything to do with keeping popular input within. Having a managerial-type of government seems to me to be the best way to negate any sort of citizen input in favour of misleading false "pragmatism". In other words, people who can envision to do good under any system see no need to spend energy on actual politics. I believe in my political values, but I am wary of seeing them enshrined in a managerial system which would never be questioned, and for which the questions would be denied legitimacy. It leads to the worse aspects of bureaucratization (the means become the ends). People who can envision no change under any nominally "democratic" system leads to voter apathy and low participation scores. I don't see this as being especially desireable, unless you are a kind of 19th century / Hansmeister exploitative bourgeois or their mouthpiece who believes the common good is better served by keeping the unwashed masses out (though I know this is a common Languish trope).

Why does good stable government require any particular enshrinement of political values?  Why does it require a "managerial system".  Why does it require peopel who "can envision no change".  All of that is contrary to what I posted.  The fact that you see a system which does not have radical changes in the way you describe underlies the difference in our politics.

[crazy canuck]

Sounds like you're ready for the Chinese model minus the corruption. 

Quite

I agree with Oex.  I'd add that another problem is that you're basically saying that people who disagree with the managerial, pragmatic style of government are beyond what's acceptable.  Because government is run in a consensual, managerial way if you're disagreeing with that then you're clearly some sort of extremist who should be avoided or should just shut up and let the adults get on with governing.  I think it's precisely this sort of thinking and cosy, consensual politics that's affected European politics since the war and is to blame for the relative success and rise of the populist far right and far left.

Your politics are similiar to Oex so I am not particularly surprised you are ignoring the parts of my post that are insonsistent with this.

[Sheilbh]

Your politics are similiar to Oex so I am not particularly surprised you are ignoring the parts of my post that are insonsistent with this.

Which parts are inconsistent and I'll think about them.

[MadImmortalMan]

I think only Americans elect judges and Sheriffs and the like.

How many states actually do that though?

I know we do it but that is mostly a reflection of our wild wild west history.

I'm fairly sure it's pretty universal in the US. I've never lived anywhere that didn't elect the Sheriff and at least some of the judges.

[Sheilbh]

I'm fairly sure it's pretty universal in the US. I've never lived anywhere that didn't elect the Sheriff and at least some of the judges.

According to Google 39 states have some elected judiciary.  Not sure about the Sheriff.