Politicians: Hanging Chads or High Fliers?, Debate - How do we secure better rulers? Options

[Guest_Jox_*]

New Debate: Democracy produces bad leaders.

Democracy is great - we're very lucky. Despite Bush's hanging chads (how to win election) scandal and the UK's First-Past-The-Post travesty, democracy is good. However...

The pressure on politicians is very great indeed. They face public scrutiny from everywhere - their fellow politicians, their opposition politicians, the media, the public, abroad and so on. The pay is not tremendous either. OK more than I get by a long way but top-fliers in other spheres earn much more with far less responsibility.

So why do it? Well many do entry politics with a desire to help others. We are cynical about politicians but many are honestly trying to do good in an area which they feel they enjoy. But are they the best we could get? Maybe more pay and less intensive scrutiny would make politics a more appealing profession to more people - and some of those would be much better at it...

Any thoughts please?

[Guest_Jox_*]

Hi Cleo, thanks for replying.

You've obviously not lived under female absolute monarchs (e.g. Queen Elizabeth I) or female democratic leaders (e.g. The Baroness Margaret Thatcher). They can be very tough leaders.

The first had many people beheaded in an attempt to secure protestant rule and catholic suppression. I seem to remember that the original Mayflower settlers, in what is now the US, were fleeing from religious intolerance.

The second, I feel, would have had people beheaded if she could! She certainly had more determination to go to war in 1982, when the Argentine invaded The Falkland Isles, than most of the men round her. (And she took the decision to order HMS Conqueror (a nuclear-powered submarine) to sink the cruiser General Belgrano - which killed 200-300 sailors and scuppered any chances of peace. (Just in case anyone picks up on that, it is a decision I personally think was right). Britain defeated the Argentine invasion (despite the Falklands being quite near the Argentine coast) and British rule was restored. (The USA assisted the UK with the sale of a new type of missile and satellite intelligence). So Thatcher was vindicated - but, had it gone t'other way, she would have been out of her job the next day. Thatcher was an excellent war leader, albeit a short war.

Politics is essential - leave it alone as the German people did in the 1930s and a very nasty monster indeed may emerge. It is a matter of life and death; of wars and of genocide. It might even finish the human race off it we are not involved. I saw the comments about "Nine-Eleven" on MM but it is no use shedding tears alone. Action must be taken and that course of action is decided by politicians.

How can one despise political issues? Politics is the reason that The USA / UK / Australia invaded Iraq earlier this year. Good decision / bad decision ... it's all politics. Politics determines how much money goes to fight crime, to educate children and (at least in the UK) is spent on the National Health Service. Politics in the USA helps keep vast numbers of guns in that society (we have too many despite it being illegal to own hand guns). The USA's National rifle Association always seems to manage to scupper proper gun control - enabling many people - including quite a few schoolchildren at schools - to be gunned-down annually. These are all political issues. They need attention. Perhaps you meant that you despise the way in which political issues are handled? If so, you may well have a point... then again, the alternative might be Saddam, Hitler or Uncle Joe.

We actually need more women in politics - and it's about time the USA had a female president is it not?