# Is Democracy Over-rated?



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2011)

In the west we have been taught that our forces fought for Democracy. Yet these governments did some pretty undemocratic things in emergencies (interring the Japanese, interring Ukrainians in WW1, etc).

On the other hand, in Canada at least, we believe in the notion of "Peace, Order and GOOD Government". (_Good_ Gov't essentially being honest, fair and accountable in some measure).

So my question in this thread is this: Is it possible to have GOOD government that is NOT Democratic Government. 

(*Moderators, please note*, I am *NOT* posting "Is the Democratic Party Over-rated" )

MM


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 21, 2011)

Just remember guys, we have a 0 politics policy on this forum. 

If the mod team decides to stop this thread we will do so.


----------



## The Basket (Nov 21, 2011)

Maybe the East European guys will tell you the ways of non democratic government.

In the UK we have a monarch who we can't get rid of....unless revolution.

So hardly democratic. Democracy is the only form of government which is accountable to its people.

Any form of dictatorship will involve false arrest false imprisonment and general put up against a wall and shot for the good of the people.

No thanks.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2011)

"... Democracy is the only form of government which is accountable to its people".

We in the West are certainly taught that . But think about Tribal Societies (which we all were once). Tribal Rule could be quite 'arbitrary' yet, unless an Elder, Chief or Councillor were _good at their job_ ... leadership, decision-making, diplomacy in both war and peace .... that leader would be gone. Replaced with one more able and/or competent.

Tribes have many advantages precisely because they are NOT democratic (in the western sense). Tribes have common blood, common values, common history, common genes. It is easy for members to equate survival of the Individual with survival of the Tribe.

Forget birthplace-of democracy-Greece. Freed by Slaves from doing any work except sports and fighting, privileged Greek men had the luxury of sitting around and talking about "government" 

Democracy's roots lie in societies that have been _forced to transition_ from one stage to another ..... King John was compelled by his nobles to accept Magna Carta (they wanted accountability for their social contract with their king) .... The American Revolution was inspired in an English society transplanted to a New World -- with new challenges and great promises of wealth and achievement. Those who conducted the revolution knew their rights, freedoms and their history -- no taxation without representation.

Both examples have been brilliant successes - measured in all fields: war, peace, culture, the arts, the media (propaganda), commerce, science. But both countries are vulnerable to attack from within -- which we are seeing with our own eyes in real time. This vulnerability lies in the truth that (like Ju Jitzu) our strengths (freedom) can be used against us.

Life (survival) teaches that_ all opinions are not equal_. All that is natural is not necessarily benign. All singing voices are not sweet. All people are not inherently good. Why would any right-minded realist pretend otherwise .... unless to walk around in denial and delusional .

90.9% of the decision-making done by governments falling into the area of "housekeeping" -- do you need a committee to figure out how it's best done? (But surely you want it done well, safely and cost-effectively) On the other hand, the "critical" decision making (war, peace, migration, alliance, famine, epidemic) requires broad consultation and buy-in. Otherwise no one would volunteer or co-operate, spelling failure of whatever venture. 

The current unravelling of the EU experiment raises serious questions about the ideal political, social, and economic organization of neighboring "tribes" of various sizes, histories and past experiences with each other. Tribalism in Europe has been totally discredited again and again (most recently Kosovo and the sad Balkins breakup) yet Europeans of various tribal origins have _what?_, to galvanize around: standards of living, security, comfort and protection. Is that good government? Yes .... but ... when you wake up with the wolf in the compound, somebody, somewhere who was responsible for keeping the wolf in check .... screwed the pooch. Good government ...?

When two companies enter into a binding contract - if it's a good one - there is built-in accountability (costs, delivery dates, disclosures etc). Yet such a contract is not democratic - and not necessarily between two equals - yet accountability can be provided.

So I ask again: Is it possible to have GOOD government that is NOT Democratic Government. 

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 21, 2011)

This has made me think Michael. 
How do you define 'good' ? Do you mean fair, just, accountable, benign ?
The British Empire could be called a 'good' non democratic governing body. I believe that ultimately it became an altruistic organisation that meant the best for its subjects.
Perhaps the same could said of the Roman Empire? Obviously there are undesirable parts of any empire, slavery etc. But, does history judge the British Roman Empires as 'good' or 'evil' ?
Europe is tribal. The UK is tribal. Its not a bad thing and as human beings we need to belong. So, the sense of belongingness that a tribe ( sic country) gives is quite normal and may explain why so many British emigrants to Australia come home after just s few years. 

We are taught that Olivier Cromwell was a great Englishman. He was, but there was a dark side too.

John


----------



## stona (Nov 21, 2011)

Try starting a thread like this in an undemocratic state,assuming it allows internet access or any kind of forum in the first place.
Steve


----------



## Readie (Nov 21, 2011)

stona said:


> Try starting a thread like this in an undemocratic state,assuming it allows internet access or any kind of forum in the first place.
> Steve



You are right Steve

John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2011)

"... Try starting a thread like this in an undemocratic state,assuming it allows internet access or any kind of forum in the first place."

Very true. Of course, , I _could _be an agent provocateur - hoping you'll disclose ..... , Stona.

Was Rome good, John? -- Lord knows enough people tried to reinstate it after it collapsed .... 

Can a democracy contain slavery ... the US did.

Tribal provides identity but boy can it ever be claustrophobic. Ask the young Norse who escaped to Iceland (Vineland).

King John who was censured into Magna Carta is remembered as "Good King John" .

Olivier Cromwell was a great Englishman ... a great soldier, a charismatic leader and a fanatic .... so was Gengis Khan.

I will note the following. My wife (born in Canada of the Estonian persuasion) pointed out an article yesterday on how well the Estonians were dealing with the Euro crisis ... there's a natural consensus. Of course they score low on the Good Samaritan Test. Probably as a result of years underSoviet Russia.

So there you go. "Peace. Order. Good Government" ..... is what you want if you're already happy and confident and mostly agree with your neighbours. You want "strife, crisis, uncertainty, government entitlements and interventions" if you are on the fringes of society, trying to take over.

Men don't fight for their countries, they say. They fight for each other (under any political system, it seems).

Chairs,

MM


----------



## Shinpachi (Nov 21, 2011)

In my country, choice of democracy was good but the quality of politicians are getting worse election by election.
Matter is not the political system but the personal qualities of candidates. They easily lie or forget what they said.
Sooner or later, we would need any checking system in public place by the people for the candidates before they stand for.
Situation is serious.


----------



## Readie (Nov 21, 2011)

Michael.


King John


History does not remember King John as particularly 'good'. Its interesting to note that no other King has been called 'John'.

Civil rights in the USA...umm yes. That's a subject on its own.

Rome brought a good deal of civilization to Great Britain and we admire the Roman Baths etc in the City of Bath to this day.

I think that to have a sense of belongingness is vital to human well being. In an historical country such as mine, to be English and provably so does give me a strong sense of identity and pride. Now, I must say that I do not look down my nose at any other country but, equally I do not look up to any either. The symbols of identity can be anything, a Spitfire, QE2, the CoE, legends like King Arthur, the stands we have made, the victories...the list is endless.

My family emigrated to Tasmania Australia as £10 Poms in 1961, to cut a long story short my mother never settled and wanted to come 'home' which we did in 1970. Our experience is not unique, relatively few stay. Much as the reasons to leave were valid the pull of 'home' was stronger.

Cromwell is celebrated or despised. It depends on your views on the Royals v Parliament and the power of the church. Was OC a dictator? some say he was....

I think that people fight to survive, whether its for each other or for their country I don't know as I have not been at war.

To take up your point about...So there you go. "Peace. Order. Good Government" ..... is what you want if you're already happy and confident and mostly agree with your neighbours. You want "strife, crisis, uncertainty, government entitlements and interventions" if you are on the fringes of society, trying to take over"

What about those who want orderly change? 

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 21, 2011)

Shinpachi said:


> In my country, choice of democracy was good but the quality of politicians are getting worse election by election.
> Matter is not the political system but the personal qualities of candidates. They easily lie or forget what they said.
> Sooner or later, we would need any checking system in public place by the people for the candidates before they stand for.
> Situation is serious.



Quite right, your situation is replicated in Europe with poor quality candidates and a catalog of shame with provable lies, expenses cheats and indiscretions.

Not good

John


----------



## N4521U (Nov 21, 2011)

stona said:


> Try starting a thread like this in an undemocratic state,assuming it allows internet access or any kind of forum in the first place.
> Steve



I do think this one says it all.
Would You like even your SMS's censored?????? 
I think not. But there is one country on this planet proposing just That.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2011)

"... orderly change? " Change is like hot water. One minute it's _water _and the next it's steam. ( a different puppy). I'm not sure orderly change is natural. 

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 21, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> "... orderly change? " Change is like hot water. One minute it's _water _and the next it's steam. ( a different puppy). I'm not sure orderly change is natural.
> 
> MM



I would hope so but, there needs to be a catalyst for long lasting and far reaching change.

John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2011)

What most see as _orderly_ change is, in truth, incremental change ...slow, unnoticed build up along a fault line or in a volcano.  This continues as a natural outcome until there is sudden, violent change, which is often transformational. And then .... it repeats .... Far reaching change, long lasting change, is usually determined by events rather than by free will, IMHO. 

MM


----------



## The Basket (Nov 21, 2011)

To say democracy is bad is to say there is an alternative.

English kings historically were dictators so only armed revolt could get rid of them. King John was no worse than others.

Rich men rule and get richer. Rupert Murdoch has power totally unelected but power he has. In any society its about one man being the master and one the servant or slave. Politics change but human nature don't.


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 21, 2011)

Running a country is like running a business on a busy high street. There are many different ways of doing it, but by far the way that is going to keep the staff happy is the one in which they are prosperous and content with their lot. Conflicting issues with other businesses, with whom your business has to trade with, often leads to conflicts of interest and a loss of trade with that party. Alliances with other businesses to ensure continual trade at times of financial crisis is a sensible idea, but essentially in order to run your business successfully, you need trade and good economists. If your money is managed efficiently, this ensures that your workforce is happy because you are bringing in enough to pay them their dues. There will always be discontent, but the alternative, isolation from the trading group, leads to even more discontent and a lack of services for the staff because the money is not there to pay for them. Your range of products available has a considerable impact on your earning power, so branching out into other specialty areas is often recommended, but only if the rewards are tangible for the successful continuation of your business and contentment of your staff.

I would have to say democracy is not over rated. Sadly, I fear the issue being questioned here is how well governments have run their businesses, rather than the political system itself, because, as many have indicated, the alternative does not bear thinking about. In the West, we don't know how lucky we are, mate. The freedoms that we enjoy have come at a huge cost.


----------



## Readie (Nov 22, 2011)

Very true. But, the hard won freedoms are in danger of being squandered with un-necessary economic upset and all the resentment that causes.

In Britain we have a government that no one actually voted into power and who has appointed itself as the crusader of 'reform' (aka massive cuts in services that are without precedent) the effects of this will touch everyone's life unless you are rich enough to enjoy private healthcare education combined with some sort of private personal guards as the state education, healthcare Police are getting a bit frayed at the edges.

So, we have riots, the increasing divide between and have's and have nots,a failing economy,PC ness that is out of control, public sector employees up in arms,a programme of swinging cuts in public services, a reduction in our armed forces and Police, our border controls in disarray and the PM wants to know if everyone is 'happy'....

As long as the lager is cheap in the supermarkets I suppose some of will be for an hour or two.

I despair for my beloved England

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 22, 2011)

Hi John, you have reason to, my friend, but I have to say; objectively, these issues being brought up in this thread are not the sole preserve of democracy. The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, i.e. capitalist tendencies are not restricted to democratically elected governments. Look at Mugabe and Idi Amin and how the population under them are/were treated by contrast to how they led their lives. We are essentially debating the failings of governments to effectively govern.

In a democracy however, we can say "enough is enough"; we can protest with a march on Wall Street. If our politicians over step the mark, like with the Iran Contra scandal or Watergate, we can bring them to task. In terms of Murdoch and the misbehaving CEOs of the big financials in the USA, we can petition the government to enact laws or put in place tighter controls over bad business practice. We can make a difference and we have a voice. Subversive activities under the alternative do not get punished and we have no rights to question those in power regardless of their behaviour. It's likely we would be beaten and our families terrorised if we spoke out of turn. Perhaps this thread should be renamed? It isn't democracy itself that is being questioned, but the incompetence of our leaders.


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 22, 2011)

If the Pee Emm wants to know if you're happy, then you tell him what you b****y well think! No! For crying out loud!


----------



## stona (Nov 22, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> If the Pee Emm wants to know if you're happy, then you tell him what you b****y well think! No! For crying out loud!



Or vote him out and give someone else a go at the first opportunity. They might not do any better but at least you have the choice. That choice has cost a lot of blood and treasure and is too often taken forgranted nowadays.
Noone was going to vote Idi Amin out and Mugabe is still hanging in there.

I'm not a monarchist but there is a huge difference between an absolute and a constitutional monarchy. CharlesI didn't get it and it cost him his head. Incidentally look at the uncanny similarities between the demands and ideals of those mid seventeenth century parliamentarians,who finally resorted to beheading a King, and the objectives and ideals of another group of revolutionaries in the American colonies a hundred years or so later. These concepts of freedom,liberty and the rights of man live on across the generations and are still extant in our democracies today. 
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Njaco (Nov 22, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> What most see as _orderly_ change is, in truth, incremental change ...slow, unnoticed build up along a fault line or in a volcano.  This continues as a natural outcome until there is sudden, violent change, which is often transformational. And then .... it repeats .... Far reaching change, long lasting change, is usually determined by events rather than by free will, IMHO.
> 
> MM



Is it change or is it entropy?

Democracy as first envisioned has deteriorated and fallen back upon itself because there was one factor that wasn't taken into account: the very common human failing called greed. Greed has so distorted democracy that most of it has become cumbersome and redundant and lost the orginal meaning. Yes, there are freedoms but through legislation, they are being eroded. Yes, one can succeed and be rich but that is slowly being taken away. And is this really a democracy in the US? I laughed the last few years when they called Obamacare 'socialist".

Lets take driving down the road.

First the car that you are driving was built according to safety standards set by the government. It must be inspected and have features as required by the Government.

The road you are driving on was created by the government to standards set by the government. There are laws from the government on how you operate that car on the road.

Even to operate that car you must be approved by the government to drive the car and must do so within certain limits such as alcohol/drug limits, vision, age.

So the the simple act of driving to the store is smothered with government intervention. Now I'm not saying this isn't good. But is this Democracy? Or is this a mutation of democracy after 200 years.

I see Democracy as visioned by the Founding Fathers as having run its course and a new versin to soon raise its head that will address the greed factor.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 22, 2011)

Interesting example. There are jursdictions in the US and Europe that are currently experimenting with eliminating traffic signs and stop lights --- in all trial cases accidents and pedestrian fatalities have gone down-- because people react to being in less-governed environments and behave more intelligently.

I personally don't much care for greed -- but it is a great motivator for some people.

Entropy is change (of a sort) but not all change is entropy.  When you drop ink into a glass of water the intensity of the ink starts to diminish immediately and continues until the water-ink mixture is homogenous. That force - to dissapate the ink in the water - is entropy IIRC. 

MM


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 22, 2011)

Where in the US have they experimented with eliminating traffic signs and stop lights ???


----------



## stona (Nov 22, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> Where in the US have they experimented with eliminating traffic signs and stop lights ???



Don't know about the US but the Dutch are big on this. There are a few such schemes appearing in th UK,one just up the road from me in Wolverhampton IIRC.

Entropy,in a scientific sense,can be seen as the direction of increasing disorder. Not a good thing in a political context.

Cheers
Steve

Edit The boss has a better memory and she says there is a junction in West Bromwich on which all signs and lights have been removed. The road in the junction is now coloured red. She also opins that "someone will be killed there before long". I learnt many years ago that she is always right!


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 22, 2011)

"... Where in the US have they experimented with eliminating traffic signs and stop lights ??? "

I may have mis-spoken on US ... checking. 

MM


----------



## The Basket (Nov 22, 2011)

Not sure how democracy can be replaced.

Not sure how driving a car and traffic lights are a sure sign of impending revolution.

The cuts in spending by the British government are a good case. Here is a government who is removing services from the people it represents and making the people worse off. Who would vote to be worse off?


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 22, 2011)

... I predict that this thread will not end well.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 22, 2011)

".... So the the simple act of driving to the store is smothered with government intervention. Now I'm not saying this isn't good. But is this Democracy? Or is this a mutation of democracy after 200 years."

I think it's called dumbing down.

"... Not sure how driving a car and traffic lights are a sure sign of impending revolution."

I must have missed that claim. 

" ... I predict that this thread will not end well."

I said that about the Euro, Matt308, . But so far ..... ? So I keep an open mind. 

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 22, 2011)

Democracy is basically the voice of the people who can choose the government and hold it accountable.
Now, we have the politics of the personality rather than policy, we have global influence on the countries economy that are outside the control of the elected government, we have a listless electorate who can't be bothered to think about who they are voting for, we have millions spent to convince us that so and so is the solution, trustworthy and that all need a change of political direction however small.
The truth is that if people cannot be bothered to vote thoughtfully, or even vote at all then we get the leaders we deserve.
As Pete Townshend said, 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'
and the vain hope that we wont get fooled again.
Some hope
John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 22, 2011)

"... we have the politics of the personality rather than policy, we have global influence on the countries economy that are outside the control of the elected government, we have a listless electorate who can't be bothered ....."

I'm not sure anything in that list is _new_ ..... to these times, R.

Let's talk about Iceland, as an example of democracy in action. Small country. Fairly homogeneous population, I'm thinking. Need to be industrious and innovative to survive in that environment. Etc. Etc. 

Institutions in Iceland invested very heavily (way too heavily, greed ) in US sub-prime mortgage derivatives (Fannie Freddie ). When the crash hit in 2008 Iceland was absolutely devastated - especially the banks. Investors in Icelandic banks from GB called for the Icelandic government to redeem their losses. Voters in Iceland were asked if they agreed with this and basically said: "NO".

Now - here we have a perfect storm. Foreign markets. Global crisis. Bad financial strategy at home in Iceland (and the UK). And what the voters there said (in the midst of their own losses) was: "we've lost millions through lack of due diligence and diversification, why should foreigners expect our banks to treat them any differently than they do us". And the Icelandic government listened.

If little countries like Iceland, Finland, Estonia, Singapore, etc. can navigate through the troubled waters of today - in a more-or-less democratic fashion - than DEMOCRACY IS NOT DEAD nor on the watch list. 

[Anyone who can post more accurately the Icelandic sub-prime derivatives crisis than I have is welcome to jump in  - I cite it only as an example].

Remember: we all have our distant biological roots in hunter-gathering . Government, back then was groups of 20-30. Bigger is NOT automatically better.

MM


----------



## Florence (Nov 22, 2011)

> Is Democracy Over-rated?



Probably not if you live in a dictatorship.

Governments are over rated. However, without some form of government/societal control then wouldn't anarchy reign? To a certain degree civilisation depends on some form of government.

Democracy at least gives you the right to chose who screws you over. 

Just a thought.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 22, 2011)

".. Governments are over rated." 

Agreed. 

[I'm from the Government. I'm here to help you."]

MM


----------



## Njaco (Nov 22, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".. Governments are over rated."
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> ...



Hey! Thats my line!!!


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 22, 2011)

There are options for representative government that are not democratic. For example, gatherings of elders from various tribes to negotiate trade, settle disputes etc is a form of non-democratic representative government which can, theoretically, be made to work even in the modern world. 

Democracy has 2 big problems that militate against its effectiveness as a system of governance:

1. It relies upon an informed population. 
2. The expectation is that people will logically vote for the best candidate.

With the technological revolution, we are drowning in information but populations are hardly better informed today than they were in the past (except, perhaps, when a politician has been caught with his pants down...literally or figuratively). To expect the vast majority of people to understand the complex financial, political, social and international challenges that face government is, frankly, ridiculous. And even if we could understand it all, we'd still be susceptible to spin from politicians, the news media, special interest groups etc etc. I also find it equally ridiculous that we are supposed to make value judgements on candidates based on little more than 30-second sound-bytes. "Tell me, Mr President, how you're going to solve the national debt problem but please keep your answer to 30 seconds as our audience can't focus for longer than that (plus we need to cut to a commercial break which will extol the virtues of a no-touch dispenser for hand sanitizer which prevents the spread of germs!)."

As for logic in voting, sadly humankind are still emotional, tribal animals. We often vote with our hearts not our heads or, worse, go with the crowd or with "tradition" ("Me Dad was a Labour man, me Grandad was a Labour man...I'm a Labour man, too!" - this must be read in a very thick northwest English accent...I know, 'cos that's where I grew up.). Given that there are dyed-in-the-wool leftists and equally obdurate right-wingers, politicians are fighting over the middle-ground of floating voters which, essentially, means that the "kingmakers" are those who sit on the fence or don't take a direct, active role in the political process - either way, it's a pitifully small proportion of the population who end up deciding who becomes the next leader. 

For all my criticism, however, it's still the best form of governance that mankind has come up with. Personally, I'd prefer it if voting was restricted to those who can prove an ability to balance both sides of a complex argument and make a reasoned selection based solely upon the merits, or otherwise, of the proposed solutions. I then get accused of being "elitist" to which I have the rebuttal that it would be a great motivator for getting people to improve their education and awareness of global issues. The downside is that, rather than improving their ability to process complex issues, the non-voting proletariat (who undoubtedly will significantly outnumber the voters) are far more likely to revolt and start a civil war...what else is there to do on a Saturday night in Bradford?

Happy thoughts!!!


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 23, 2011)

Firstly, Readie, I should apologise if my last post was mistaken for being a bit harsh; I was merely expressing my concern for the British government's apparent impotence with regard to recent events in the UK; I suspect little will change after the riots. The talk is strong, but the will is weak.

NJACO, although I agree that perhaps there is aspects of our lives that we might have little control over, perhaps the example you gave was not the best, however. Most of the things you listed would have been put before a committee of elected representatives and passed as law. Laws don't just pop up and become established. They have to be voted on in parliament/congress. If there is more opposition to them than favour, they will not be passed. You, as a citizen of your nation have the right to oppose or support any issue put forward by the government. Regarding greed as an element of human nature, as I pointed out earlier, greed is not the sole preserve of a democratic process. Overhauling the political system won't change a thing in this regard. It is up to the government to implement higher taxes on those who earn over a certain amount, or put controls in place to enable welfare for those who desperately require it. Changing the political system will not alter the growing income gap between the rich and poor in the USA.

Buffnut453 (453 Sqn?) I agree with much of what you are saying (mitigate, rather than _militate_)



> Given that there are dyed-in-the-wool leftists and equally obdurate right-wingers, politicians are fighting over the middle-ground of floating voters which, essentially, means that the "kingmakers" are those who sit on the fence or don't take a direct, active role in the political process - either way, it's a pitifully small proportion of the population who end up deciding who becomes the next leader.



The simple way of changing this is by imposing a law (NJACO's gonna hate this one) stating that it is compulsory to vote. They do this in Australia, you can receive huge fines for not voting. Or you can put in place a different means of electing your representatives in parliament. New Zealanders will go to the polls on Saturday and we will make a decision, not just on which party will govern for the next three years, or maybe four if John Key (National, centre right) gets in again, but also whether proportional representation is maintained or one of three other options is put in place. If MMP remains, it will be examined and changed, as many argue that minority parties have too much say over who gets into power depending on alliances formed beforehand. Anyhoo, deciding which demographic in society votes is not the right way to go about it. If you want people to improve their political awareness, then it is up to your government to put measures in place to enable them to do so. Education is not just down to us, but, as they say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it think.



> ...what else is there to do on a Saturday night in Bradford?


  Eat pie and mooshy pees! I notice you no longer live there.

Perhaps the United States needs to change its system to a fairer one? Readie pointed out the cult of personality; crikey! The President is almost revered like a god over there! How would the Unted States fare if proportional representation was in place, where minority parties had a greater voice and the big two were reliant on them to form a working government?


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Hi nuuumannn,

Mitigate = makes something less severe
Militate against = affect something adversely

I knew what I was saying....I think 

Making it compulsory to vote doesn't improve either of the issues I raised - the uninformed still have the loudest voice and the "floating voter" remains a minority and hence has a disproportionate impact on the outcome of elections.

Proportional representation, if implemented at all, needs to be done so very, VERY carefully. It's too easy to reach the ridiculous situation where every policy gets stalled because the squillions of little parties are all wasting time working out alliances on every single issue. In short, there's a real chance of absolutely nothing getting done - ever.

As for Bradford...I just chose that at random. I'm actually from t'other side o' t'border - St.Helens (when it was Lancashire not Merseyside).


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> Firstly, Readie, I should apologise if my last post was mistaken for being a bit harsh;



No need mate, I didn't think that you were doing anything other than expressing your opinion.

I think that we have been taken for a ride here in Britain, and with another out of touch upper class twit in charge what hope is there?

The latest pictures in the newspapers shows Cameron walking in a park with his baby in a papoose with a headline saying that the PM is 'too busy to take your call'...its almost as bad as Blair on TV being seen running out of his home with a cup of coffee and toast to eat on the way to work... 'one of the people?' I should coca.

Bevan would turn in his grave if he could see these clowns.

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 23, 2011)

> Making it compulsory to vote doesn't improve either of the issues I raised - the uninformed still have the loudest voice and the "floating voter" remains a minority and hence has a disproportionate impact on the outcome of elections



Hi Buffnut453, would you rather they not vote at all, thereby compounding the problem? If they had to vote, they _might_ put a bit more thought into what they were doing? The answer to your dilemma is, as I stated education, which, again depends on the individual, nevertheless, you can't restrict voting to a particular demographic. That is not democratic at all. 



> Proportional representation, if implemented at all, needs to be done so very, VERY carefully. It's too easy to reach the ridiculous situation where every policy gets stalled because the squillions of little parties are all wasting time working out alliances on every single issue. In short, there's a real chance of absolutely nothing getting done - ever.



That's a bit of an oversimplification; I can tell you that in reality the alliances can and do work effectively if they have good leadership. Many countries, including New Zealand have proven that it can work, granted, the system needs a bit of adjusting, but it is probably the fairest system of democratic government there is. FPP certainly is not fair and doesn't give minority parties any voice at all. There is also likely to be less satisfaction among the voters if they know that the election will always be a two-horse race. I lived in the UK during the Blair and Major years and I saw how and why the Tories lost and Labour came to power in 1997, I also saw how disillusioned they became with Labour through successive elections. I think the catch phrase of the last election Blair won, by a very slim margin, became "better the devil you know, than the devil you don't". 



> As for Bradford...I just chose that at random. I'm actually from t'other side o' t'border - St.Helens (when it was Lancashire not Merseyside).



 off topic slightly, I take it you are one of those select individuals who refuse to believe the Brewster Buffalo was a dog? I'm with you there. For the most underrated combat aircraft however, my choice is the Boulton Paul Defiant.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 23, 2011)

".... populations are hardly better informed today than they were in the past"

I would argue that on many things populations are less well informed today -- people are exposed to so much information that they no longer know what or who they are.
Am I really a woman in this man's body ....huh? Was my grandaddy a WW2 murdering airman .... WTF! I could go on but I think you get my drift 

MM


----------



## Njaco (Nov 23, 2011)

No worries Nuuumann. Maybe I didn't express myself very well. Like Buffnut, with all its warts this is still the best mode of government around. My point, I guess that I was trying to make is that there is a very real distiction between ideal democracy and democracy in practice (similiar to Marxist Communism amd Stalinist Communism). Because I work and am a small part of the government, I see how there is a blurred line between idealogly and reality.

Don't get me wrong. I love this country and welcome the form of government we have. But when every once and awhile, through my job, I have somebody arrested and brought to court in shackles because they didn't get their dog licensed for $10, it does bother me on some level.


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 23, 2011)

The president almost revered like a god !! In the USA ?? Not in my lifetime.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Nuuumannn,

I didn't say PR was unworkable, simply that it had to be implemented very, very carefully. Look at Italy in the 1990s - the entire political process was stymied because there were just too many political parties.

To your other point, forcing people to vote doesn't solve the 2 underlying issues I identified. Letting ill-informed people decide the future path of the nation is profoundly illogical. It's the best we've got and I don't see many workable alternatives but the problems remain. My last para about only allowing people to vote if they had attained a certain level of cognitive ability is one way to enable more informed elections but I think it's impractical to implement and would result in a huge swath of disenfranchised people who would definitely not support the idea.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Nuuumannn,

One other point - you say that restricting voting to a certain demographic would not be democratic (now there's a sentence - let's all say it together 3 times, quickly!). I guess it depends on your definition of democratic. In an entirely democratic society, the people would have an opportunity to vote on all key aspects of the day. That was impractical in the past but with technological advances may become increasingly feasible. Our current democratic models overcame the issue by electing representatives but, even then, there have been times when voting was restricted to certain groups - only land-owning white males, for instance. Again, I'm not say restricted voting is right, just that it's one way to overcome the current democratic model's problems.


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> The president almost revered like a god !! In the USA ?? Not in my lifetime.



JFK was wasn't he Tom?


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".... populations are hardly better informed today than they were in the past"
> 
> I would argue that on many things populations are less well informed today -- people are exposed to so much information that they no longer know what or who they are.
> 
> MM



Michael. yes you are right. Too much information. But, also too much biased information. If you google the EU /EZ problems you will gey ummpteen sites, all very august and learned that people quote from chapter and verse but..look further and you'll see polictical (and worse) bias etc lurking in the shadows.

Proganda is a subject that intrigues me, from the clipped very English tones of Pathe news in WW2 and the 1950's to the same faintly patronising tone of the early Television programmes. Auntie knows best you know...

The one thing that I think is healthy is robust ridicule and caustic wit in papers like Private Eye to expose the bigwigs and polictical animals for what they really are.

John


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Sadly, there's no such thing as pristine, unbiased opinion. Briefing papers prepared by Whitehall mandarins are heavily doctored to present the British Government in the best light or to point towards the result that the sitting Government wants to achieve. The press are no better, indeed they're worse because we can't vote them out of office. As for t'internet - well, the least said about that the better. We are constantly subject to information that has been filtered, processed and spun. The only way through it is to read both sides of the argument (or all sides, as there are often many more than just 2 views on an issue) and then attempt to make your own mind up. And we all have plenty of time each day to do that, don't we????


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 23, 2011)

Readie said:


> The one thing that I think is healthy is robust ridicule and caustic wit in papers like Private Eye to expose the bigwigs and polictical animals for what they really are.



I used to love reading Private Eye! That programme with Paul Merton and Ian Hislop, Private Eye's ed, with Angus Deaton was brilliant as well!

Sadly, this whole 'feel good' approach in government with an excess of spin doctors has been adopted from big business; it's all based on someone's business model for promoting a healthy attitude in the workplace. In the company I work for there is a lot of that, catch phrases creep in to corporate speeches, like "blah blah blah, *going forward*..." We used to play W**k bingo to see how many of these buzz words would appear in 'state of the nation' addresses. All they do is alienate the work force, the same with the general population. 

Hey NJACO, I don't know much about the law, but I get what you're saying; I remember a few years back a farmer shot a burglar stealing from his barn, but the farmer ended up in prison as a result. There was a national outcry here, and I think (I _hope_) the law has been changed.

buffnut453, I'd be careful about the credibility of using Italy as an example of illustrating your point  but I understand what you are saying about PR; there are, however, more examples where it has worked successfully than not, after implementation. As I said, it's not perfect; the current system is up for overhaul here, even if it is voted in again, but it is a fairer system than FPP.

Regarding disinformation; at least we have forums like this!


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 23, 2011)

Readie said:


> JFK was wasn't he Tom?



JFK's popularity might have actually went up AFTER he was killed. But during his short stay in the white house he had his detractors just like any president, he wasn't very popular in the south.


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 23, 2011)

Americans elevating the President to god-like status? Maybe that's a bit of an exxaggeration on my part  but to the rest of the world it at least looks that way. Could you imagine the British, New Zealand or Australian population being expected to behave in a similar way toward their prime ministers as Americans do toward their presidents? Not gonna happen!


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 23, 2011)

You people don't live here, you've really got no idea how we treat our presidents.

Just a for instance, how many presidents have been assasinated ? How many serious attempts? Now ask the same question about British Prime ministers, or Australian, or New Zealand, etc. 

I admit, that is a extreme example.

I'm getting off topic I think, nice debate though.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Part of the problem with English-speaking nations is a tendency to assume that the fact of us speaking the same(ish) language leads to closer similarities in other areas. People are often shocked at how different we all are and, to get this rambling post back on-topic, how different our political institutions are. Those of us who are familiar with Parliamentary democracy, where a political party is elected with a manifesto of policies and the leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister, are confused by the furore developed over, say, US Presidential elections when the President is greatly limited in what he/she can do by Congress and the Senate. To a non-US observer, the "promises" made during the electoral campaign bear no reality to the actual changes implemented after election. US and Parliamentary approaches are very different forms of democracy, and there are others - just look at Europe!


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> JFK's popularity might have actually went up AFTER he was killed. But during his short stay in the white house he had his detractors just like any president, he wasn't very popular in the south.



Fair comment Tom.Just goes to show how ones trans Atlantic perception can differ from reality.
If you had said that the Iron (hearted) lady Mrs Thatcher was revered in the UK I would have challenged you 
Cheers
John


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> I used to love reading Private Eye! That programme with Paul Merton and Ian Hislop, Private Eye's ed, with Angus Deaton was brilliant as well



Have I got news for you. Brilliant and I love getting idiots like Nigel Farage on it. They never fail....

John


----------



## N4521U (Nov 23, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> Americans elevating the President to god-like status? Maybe that's a bit of an exxaggeration on my part  but to the rest of the world it at least looks that way. Could you imagine the British, New Zealand or Australian population being expected to behave in a similar way toward their prime ministers as Americans do toward their presidents? Not gonna happen!



Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> Part of the problem with English-speaking nations is a tendency to assume that the fact of us speaking the same(ish) language leads to closer similarities in other areas. US and Parliamentary approaches are very different forms of democracy, and there are others - just look at Europe!



Very true and well said.
We do assume (too much sometimes).
Do we have to look at Europe though....

John


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 23, 2011)

I think Mrs. Thatcher might have been better liked in the USA than Britain.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

Readie said:


> Do we have to look at Europe though....



No but it's hard not to sneak the occasional peak through the gaps between one's fingers - it's like a train wreck that you can see about to happen but you just can't stop yourself from looking.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 23, 2011)

N4521U said:


> Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!



The US electoral process in the 18th century wouldn't be what you refer to as democratic either - no votes for women, no votes for blacks etc etc. Don't forget, Britain was a republic before the US was!

On a more serious note, the point you raise reinforces my previous post about lack of similarities between the various political systems. All are considered "democratic" but they vary widely and anyone who grows up in one system finds it hard to comprehend the others.


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

N4521U said:


> Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!



Not entirely, we gave the colonies ( including your America) stable governing and democracy.
The commonwealth have had their chances to 'boot out the British' Monarchy and chosen not to.
Blood is thicker than water
John


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I think Mrs. Thatcher might have been better liked in the USA than Britain.



Ah yes, the Regan - Thatcher love in. You are probably right. We hated her.
I shudder at the memory.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 23, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> No but it's hard not to sneak the occasional peak through the gaps between one's fingers - it's like a train wreck that you can see about to happen but you just can't stop yourself from looking.



Groan...if you must. Luckily I can't see France from Plymouth Hoe


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 23, 2011)

N4521U said:


> Well, being a Yank in Oz, I am experiencing the real reason for the Colonies booting out the British form of government, it is not what I would refer to as democratic!


Disagree , I like the fact that a minority goverment can be chucked out in a parlimentary system , right now I'm priveledged to watch a 2 year election campaign to the south of me .


----------



## N4521U (Nov 23, 2011)

Readie said:


> Not entirely, we gave the colonies ( including your America) stable governing and democracy. *Surely you jest.*
> The commonwealth have had their chances to 'boot out the British' Monarchy and chosen not to. *That is because the PM's and Ministers would be relieved of their ability to pick our pockets with new taxes, taxes for nothing more than to fill the pockets of them in office*
> Blood is thicker than water *Don't think blood has anything to do with it*
> John


...


----------



## N4521U (Nov 23, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> Disagree , I like the fact that a minority goverment can be chucked out in a parlimentary system , right now I'm priveledged to watch a 2 year election campaign to the south of me .



And what about the PM being chucked out by a flaming out of control red head. And a rock singer managing the funding of a project worth millions, that blows out to nearly billions, and then is given another portfolio to Manage. Then she chucks out a policy introduced by a previous party that controlled illegal entry because it was introduced by the previous party and we end up with three boatloads in two days. Or doubles our contribution to a fund even the British ministers want no part of. How about we send our Carbon Tax Your way?????? Yes? Or better yet, we give you our red head!


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 23, 2011)

N4521U said:


> And what about the PM being chucked out by a flaming out of control red head. And a rock singer managing the funding of a project worth millions, that blows out to nearly billions, and then is given another portfolio to Manage. Then she chucks out a policy introduced by a previous party that controlled illegal entry because it was introduced by the previous party and we end up with three boatloads in two days. Or doubles our contribution to a fund even the British ministers want no part of. How about we send our Carbon Tax Your way?????? Yes? Or better yet, we give you our red head!


sucks to be you,


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 23, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I'm getting off topic I think, nice debate though.



No, not at all; worth having, and regarding your comment about Thatcher and the Americans; so true! 

That's it, John! Have I got news for you!



> sucks to be you


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 23, 2011)

LMAO

Deep thoughts by pb...............


----------



## Readie (Nov 24, 2011)

N4521U said:


> ...



I'm completely serious with the points in my post.
There are stronger links between Britain and the Commonwealth than you seem to understand.
We squabble and sulk but, at the end of the day the Monachy and blood binds us together.
John


----------



## N4521U (Nov 24, 2011)

I do understand, 
That was My point.


----------



## N4521U (Nov 24, 2011)

I do understand, 
That was My point.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 24, 2011)

Outstanding commentary - for fun and insight. Science fiction can never be political, can it ..? 

Niall Ferguson on 2021: The New Europe - WSJ.com

MM


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 24, 2011)

Nice one!


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 24, 2011)

Readie said:


> I'm completely serious with the points in my post.
> There are stronger links between Britain and the Commonwealth than you seem to understand.
> We squabble and sulk but, at the end of the day the Monachy and blood binds us together.
> John


I disagree , yes we have the Queen on coins and stamps but thats about it


----------



## Readie (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I disagree , yes we have the Queen on coins and stamps but thats about it



We still love the Commonwealth and despite your denials the vast of Commonwealth peoples love Blighty too.
After all, most of you have blood links to Albion.

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I disagree , yes we have the Queen on coins and stamps but thats about it



Canada is a constitutional Monarchy with Queen Elizabeth II as Head of State. That's is quite a bit more than a head on a coin and a couple of stamps.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 24, 2011)

Bet ya over 50% of the people here don't know that or care to


----------



## Readie (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> Bet ya over 50% of the people here don't know that or care to



We have had this conversation before Neil. As a country Canada is still bound to Britain. Whether the people want to be is another matter, which brings us nicely back to the thread...a democratic vote will allow the people of Canada to accept or reject being a constitutional monarchy.
I don't see any evidence of the rejection vote. Like the Australians you love to 'hate' us 

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> Bet ya over 50% of the people here don't know that or care to



I suspect you're exaggerating.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 24, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> I suspect you're exaggerating.


In all truth I believe the number of 50% is very low, and Readie we ain't bound by @@@@ .There is 

aught, blank, bottom, cipher, insignificancy, love, lowest point, nada, nadir, naught, nil, nix, nobody, nonentity, nought, nullity, oblivion, ought, rock bottom, scratch, shutout, void, zilch, zip, zot loyalty to the UK


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> In all truth I believe the number of 50% is very low, and Readie we ain't bound by @@@@ .There is aught, blank, bottom, cipher, insignificancy, love, lowest point, nada, nadir, naught, nil, nix, nobody, nonentity, nought, nullity, oblivion, ought, rock bottom, scratch, shutout, void, zilch, zip, zot loyalty to the UK



Back on topic, now; getting bored by Canadian lack of interest.

On the topic of possible alternatives to democratic systems and capitalism currently in place, from the mid 1970s to the mid 1980s, New Zealand went from being the most heavily regulated democratic society in the world, "Fortress New Zealand" as it was dubbed, to a free market economy. After Rob Muldoon became Prime Minister in 1975, he introduced a cradle-to-the-grave welfare system that ensured that the ordinary New Zealander would have their own home on a quarter acre section of land, a car and a good income. He almost succeeded. His policies didn't really support the natives, who still largely lived in poverty and could neither read nor write.

Nevertheless, New Zealand became, according to one political commentator, the closest that any western democracy came to being a Socialist Utopia, despite Muldoon's party being classified as 'centre-right'. Every aspect of life was strictly controlled by government legistlation; from interest rates to what could be bought and sold in the local corner shop. If you wanted to buy a house or set up a business, or even go overseas, you had to apply for a licence to do so. The Bureaucracy structure was enormous and constituted the largest manpower organisation of the government. I remember as a youngster being in awe of the fact that one of the kids in my class had been overseas. This was not a common thing in the 1970s.

New Zealand's import/export status was not viewed very highly around the world, although it was the biggest exporter of beef and dairy products to Britain until that country became part of the EEC, which caused an enormous backlash, especially in rural communities. Few countries wished to trade with NZ because of its closed market policy. This meant that inward goods were few and far between; New Zealanders had to settle for home made imitations of foreign goods, like radios, tvs etc. Things like parmesan cheese and salami were unheard of. The most exotic way to eat was macaroni cheese and Chinese takeaways. 

Muldoon, being Finance Minister decided the interest rates, which created rampant inflation. Because the economy was at the whim of Muldoon and not the common market, essential industries, such as agriculture and forestry were heavily subsidised. The problem was, the country was going bankrupt. In 1983 the Reserve Bank of New Zealand said that the money had run out and no one was going to lend us anymore. That year Muldoon called a snap election over the nuclear free NZ issue, which he did not support, despite some in his party who did (Marilyn Waring, the woman who defied the Prime Minister and by doing so sparked the biggest political overhaul in our history). Always a man who presumed he connected with the average NZer, although he really hadn't a clue, his party lost by a land slide.

David Lange's Labour party introduced a series of wide ranging and some say crippling policies, which dragged the country, kicking and screaming into the world markets. Sadly, the social outcome of these sweeping changes were apalling and many lost their jobs and small communities relying on state funded subsidies for their prime industries (forestry et al) evaporated almost overnight, as their citizens moved to the cities for work. Naturally, the money markets experienced a boom due to the fact that business found itself with an excess of cash and the ability to buy and sell abroad, which they never had before. it all came crashing down in the 1987 stock market crash. My parents lost a lot of money and we moved to Australia.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 24, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> According to you. You try walking into any returned service organisation in Canada spouting that. Oh, I forgot, those are the small minority that do. .


I'm almost 60 ,served nearly 10 years in the Canadian Forces am quite aware of the heraldry and such that the squadrons I served with yet I look around at my long time friends and about the only thing they care about the UK is Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin etc . Plain and simple the UK don't matter to the run of the mill person here anymore then France or Egypt


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 24, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I'm almost 60 ,served nearly 10 years in the Canadian Forces am quite aware of the heraldry and such that the squadrons I served with yet I look around at my long time friends and about the only thing they care about the UK is Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin etc . Plain and simple the UK don't matter to the run of the mill person here anymore then France or Egypt



Really? I still find it hard to believe despite what you are saying. That's sad not to acknowledge your history. It still doesn't alter what John wrote though. Even a love for British Rock Music counts, maaan.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 24, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> Really? I still find it hard to believe despite what you are saying. That's sad not to acknowledge your history. It still doesn't alter what John wrote though. Even a love for British Rock Music counts, maaan.


History is acknowledged but its different history with different influences. The sports played here are not the same Cricket is not played unless you are from SE Asia or the Carribean, the media is different the food is different . I can't even think of a person I know that eats mutton you have more chance of eating moose or venison .


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 24, 2011)

"..... Like the Australians you love to 'hate' us"

We don't call you pommes .... but ... pb has a point.  If a referendum was held to reject the Monarchy in Canada, I'm not at all sure the House of Windsor would prevail. 

I don't share your sentiments pb but there is no denying that your sentiments are widely held in Canada. Just don't touch our Parliamentary Democracy. It works. 

Proud Canadian and Monarchist

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> In all truth I believe the number of 50% is very low, and Readie we ain't bound by @@@@ .There is
> 
> aught, blank, bottom, cipher, insignificancy, love, lowest point, nada, nadir, naught, nil, nix, nobody, nonentity, nought, nullity, oblivion, ought, rock bottom, scratch, shutout, void, zilch, zip, zot loyalty to the UK



Canada royal visit: Prince William and Kate Middleton begin tour of North America | Mail Online

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jul/01/william-kate-visit-canada

If you say so Neil...

John


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 25, 2011)

Readie said:


> Canada royal visit: Prince William and Kate Middleton begin tour of North America | Mail Online
> 
> William and Kate's visit highlights Canada's weirdness | Colin Horgan | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
> 
> ...


 I really think you are reading to much into the visit it was post wedding If I brought a 5 legged dog to some of the places they visited it would draw the same, watch to see what happens after a no wedding visit....no one cares .


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I really think you are reading to much into the visit it was post wedding If I brought a 5 legged dog to some of the places they visited it would draw the same, watch to see what happens after a no wedding visit....no one cares .



There are a lot of people here who profess the same sentiments as you Neil.

The world will celebrate QE2 's diamond anniversary next year with or without the dissenters.

I would say that a lot of the WASP Commonwealth are in denial of their British roots. Your countries are young enough for that not to be so far away in generation terms either.

John


----------



## GrauGeist (Nov 25, 2011)

Readie said:


> Not entirely, we gave the colonies ( including your America) stable governing and democracy.
> The commonwealth have had their chances to 'boot out the British' Monarchy and chosen not to.
> Blood is thicker than water
> John


Some people think that we Colonists kicked the British out because of such things like "taxation without representation", heavy handed governing, religious reasons and so-on...

Actually, we didn't like the Tea...


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> Some people think that we Colonists kicked the British out because of such things like "taxation without representation", heavy handed governing, religious reasons and so-on...
> 
> Actually, we didn't like the Tea...



Touche.
Maybe we did that on purpose...

Not like Tea? Good heavens, Tea has kept the Empire afloat for decades and is our solution to all disaster, injury and ghastly foreigners who dare to threaten invasion of out green and pleasant land. 

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 25, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> Actually, we didn't like the Tea...



Ha Haa! I remember when I worked in the UK, the guys I worked with had tea breaks all the time; a group of them dinged the rudder of a Spitfire because they all rushed off for a tea break without chocking the wheels!


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 25, 2011)

Democracy will never die so long as we can have a nice cuppa tea!


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> Democracy will never die so long as we can have a nice cuppa tea!



How true, Tea is the global lubricant of freedom. 
If you want a mission, teach our French friends how to make a decent brew.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> Ha Haa! I remember when I worked in the UK, the guys I worked with had tea breaks all the time; a group of them dinged the rudder of a Spitfire because they all rushed off for a tea break without chocking the wheels!



'Tea breaks' have kept the wolf from the door for generations Grant,

Shame about the Spitfire though...must have been a coffee lover at fault

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 25, 2011)

Readie said:


> 'Tea breaks' have kept the wolf from the door for generations Grant,
> 
> Shame about the Spitfire though...must have been a coffee lover at fault
> 
> John



Hee hee! I remember starting there for the first time and walking into the crew room and sitting down, then having them just stare at me and say: "Well? Aren't you going to put the kettle on?"


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> Hee hee! I remember starting there for the first time and walking into the crew room and sitting down, then having them just stare at me and say: "Well? Aren't you going to put the kettle on?"




The immortal words that separates the British from the rest of the world.
Can't beat a cuppa.

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 25, 2011)

The Spitty still has a ding in its tail to this day! One national icon forsaken for another!


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> The Spitty still has a ding in its tail to this day! One national icon forsaken for another!



Damaging our beloved and much admired Spitfire is an offence that should be punished by transportation for life to a far flung part of the Empire.
With no tea either 

John


----------



## GrauGeist (Nov 25, 2011)

Ha!

Just imagine if coffee wasn't available in Europe during WWII...not a single G.I. would have showed up for the fight!

So it looks like Coffee helped save the Tea, doesn't it?


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> Ha!
> 
> Just imagine if coffee wasn't available in Europe during WWII...not a single G.I. would have showed up for the fight!
> 
> So it looks like Coffee helped save the Tea, doesn't it?



Not necessarily...Tea came first and your forefathers decided to cut old Blighty adrift after a couple of misunderstandings and go your own way (with our benevolent approval rather as a father views an unruly but, good hearted child) 
A few of your upper classes kept up the Tea habit while others experimented with some horrendous bean called coffee. 'no good will come of it' we warned...'cultural malais awaits...'
After a while in England your GI's discovered the delights of Tea, southeastern English girls, driving on the right side of the road, manual gearbox's and proper beer. So, apart from feeling good after sorting out Europe you also were culturally enriched.
Not a bad deal.
John


----------



## GrauGeist (Nov 25, 2011)

lmao...well, you see how well it took...we still drink coffee, drive on the proper side of the road with automatic trannies all while enjoying the democratic freedom to choose the beer of our own liking!

We just didn't say anything because you guys were under alot of stress at the time


----------



## Readie (Nov 25, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> lmao...well, you see how well it took...we still drink coffee, drive on the proper side of the road with automatic trannies all while enjoying the democratic freedom to choose the beer of our own liking!
> 
> We just didn't say anything because you guys were under alot of stress at the time




hahaha...that brought a smile.
American beer..With the greatest respect its no different to the lager the Europeans call 'beer'. Beer is our domain.
We may have copied some parts of your American culture like 1950's fins and Harley Davidson's but, you cannot build a decent sports car...well one that goes around corners anyway.
I think that you secretly envy us and would love to be part of the Commonwealth and enjoy our patronage.
John


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 25, 2011)

Readie said:


> you cannot build a decent sports car


I'm not claiming that we have but neither have you since the the 60's and those lacked neccessities like heat or defrosters


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 25, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> lmao...well, you see how well it took...we still drink coffee, drive on the proper side of the road with automatic trannies all while enjoying the democratic freedom to choose the beer of our own liking!



Hmmm...driving on the "proper" side of the road? You drive on the right...you copied the French!! Enough said! EVERYONE knows the proper side of the road to drive on is the left.

As for most American beers...time to roll out the old "sex in a canoe" gag!


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 25, 2011)

Yhough I agree US beer is not up to snuff anywhere they did do one thing correct with it and thats putting it in the refridgerator


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I'm not claiming that we have but neither have you since the the 60's and those lacked neccessities like heat or defrosters



TVR Morgan. Both classic sports cars Neil and newer than the 60's icons.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> Yhough I agree US beer is not up to snuff anywhere they did do one thing correct with it and thats putting it in the refridgerator




or the bin...


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 26, 2011)

Readie said:


> or the bin...


That would be a Brit car over here


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 26, 2011)

Readie said:


> I think that you secretly envy us and would love to be part of the Commonwealth and enjoy our patronage.
> John



And live for a monarchy? Yeah never in a million years...



buffnut453 said:


> As for most American beers...time to roll out the old "sex in a canoe" gag!



Yes that is something we American's can not be proud of.

When it comes to beer, I claim my German side of the family... 



pbfoot said:


> That would be a Brit car over here



Only decent Brit Car would be a Landrover, and it was originally built on a Jeep chassis.


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 26, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Only decent Brit Car would be a Landrover, and it was originally built on a Jeep chassis.



The prototype Landrover was built on a jeep chassis but that's about it. As for it being the only decent Brit car, have you ever driven a Mini? Other than flying, it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And live for a monarchy? Yeah never in a million years...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You American's protest too much.

I know you are in your heart of hearts rather jealous of Blighty.

A monarchy, hundreds of years of history, an Empire Commonwealth where we were loved and admired, traditions, legends, a full range of real ale, proper sports cars, the Supermarine Spitfire and a temperate climate. These are the basis of a nation and even Mr Cameron and the EU cannot take that away from us.

Not to mention all the inventions that have stemmed from Britain.

Decent British cars? The list is endless...

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> The prototype Landrover was built on a jeep chassis but that's about it. As for it being the only decent Brit car, have you ever driven a Mini? Other than flying, it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!



Mini's are unbeatable on the tight twisty roads in the South West. Fantastic fun.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> That would be a Brit car over here



Well, there were some build quality issues years ago with some sports cars. But, getting a Triumph to run properly with all the US emission crap attached to it is part of the challenge Neil.

I don't believe that all USA cars were made that well either....

John


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 26, 2011)

Readie you icon car is a late 80's Chevy Camaro.


----------



## Readie (Nov 26, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> Readie you icon car is a late 80's Chevy Camaro.



Don' get me wrong Tom, I love US muscle cars AC Cobra's. There are so different to our own cars.
In my dream garage I would have a full works Mini at one end and a '66 GT350 Shelby Mustang at the other.
Cheers
John


----------



## Ferdinand Foch (Nov 26, 2011)

Looks like I'm missing all of the fun again. Haha, hope everyone's doing good. Would post more but school's killing me. Well, I don't think Democracy is overrated. Sure, we have done bad things in the past (then again, everyone else does). But, democratic countries are one of the few forms of government that will aknowledge that these bad things have happened-well, at least from the response of the people. In truth, I am perfectly happy living in a democratic country. Like the US...we may have faults, but it is human to have faults, even in government. Unfortunately, nobody is perfect. That being said, I wouldn't mind living in the Isles (Ireland in particular). Might be fun. Oh, and American cars are great, but I've had my 1998 Volvo S70 for almost five years now, and I love that car. You Brit's make great cars too, but the Swedes are pretty high up there as well.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 26, 2011)

Careful John .....  Is this really what you think about us Canadians ..... (from Your Guardian link):

".... Canada is kind of a weird place. The stereotypical pleasantries of its peoples are there, but they rest on the edge of mass insecurity, just this side of a fully fledged personality disorder."

Now, you see _most_ people would be _insulted_ by that .... 

Proud Canadian ... I think ... 

MM


----------



## parsifal (Nov 26, 2011)

Looks like Im late for this party. Too many posts to read here. Anyone want to tqake pity on me and say where you guys are up to.


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 26, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Proud Canadian ... I think ...



Hey Mike, In my short existence I've come across many Canadians (they let you out??) and I've found them pretty laid back and keen on a good drink. I guess people are always different when they are not in their home country. I was fond of a girl from Saskatchewan (??) once. The people I met had pretty ambivalent feelings about ("a_boot_") their home, with few interests except sports (hah kee!) and doing sweet f**k all!

I'd love to visit Canada someday; I hear the scenery is fantastic and you guys have some great aviation museums and warbirds over there.


----------



## davparlr (Nov 26, 2011)

When you have a big engine, who needs to turn. In the 1950 Le Mans, a slightly modified Cadillac coupe came in 10th! A more heavily modified Cadillac came in 11th, after a crash.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 27, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> The prototype Landrover was built on a jeep chassis but that's about it. As for it being the only decent Brit car, have you ever driven a Mini? Other than flying, it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!



I have driven one, but I can put it in my Jeep, so why drive one?


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

".... Looks like Im late for this party. Too many posts to read here. Anyone want to tqake pity on me and say where you guys are up to...."

Sure, Parsifal, we're talking about whether or not the _cars_ produced in democracies are over-related ... I think .... 

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

".... The people I met had pretty ambivalent feelings about [ ... ] their home, with few interests except sports and doing sweet f**k all!..."

As compared to say the Anzacs, Nuuumannn ... 

MM

Unambivalent Canadian


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Careful John .....  Is this really what you think about us Canadians ..... (from Your Guardian link):
> 
> ".... Canada is kind of a weird place. The stereotypical pleasantries of its peoples are there, but they rest on the edge of mass insecurity, just this side of a fully fledged personality disorder."
> 
> ...



Michael,
The Guardian link and the other one was in reply to Neil's declaration that the UK meant nothing to modern Canadians.
The Guardian is a law unto itself and I do not know whether they are right to say these things about Canada.
I certainty would not deliberately insult allies , I meant only to show two sides to the argument about historical loyalty.

We share the same opinions but, others don't !!

Cheers
John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

MM


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 27, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I have driven one, but I can put it in my Jeep, so why drive one?



If you need to ask then you just don't get it.


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

Ferdinand Foch said:


> Looks like I'm missing all of the fun again. Haha, hope everyone's doing good. Would post more but school's killing me. Well, I don't think Democracy is overrated. Sure, we have done bad things in the past (then again, everyone else does). But, democratic countries are one of the few forms of government that will aknowledge that these bad things have happened-well, at least from the response of the people. In truth, I am perfectly happy living in a democratic country. Like the US...we may have faults, but it is human to have faults, even in government. Unfortunately, nobody is perfect. That being said, I wouldn't mind living in the Isles (Ireland in particular). Might be fun. Oh, and American cars are great, but I've had my 1998 Volvo S70 for almost five years now, and I love that car. You Brit's make great cars too, but the Swedes are pretty high up there as well.




Volvo's are iconic cars here. It would be easy to believe thay when the bombs drop the only thiongs to survive would be cockroachs and your dad's Volvo 240 Estate.
Ireland is a lovely place, much slower paced than Britain with beautiful scenery especially in Kerry. Not to mention the rather good Guinness

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

parsifal said:


> Looks like Im late for this party. Too many posts to read here. Anyone want to tqake pity on me and say where you guys are up to.



Hello Michael, the thread has wandered from a discussion about historical loyalty to QE2, the relevance of the Royalty in Commonwealth countries today, an agreement that USA beer is...er, not as good as British real ale,a denial that America would love to be part of QE2's domain, that Chris can fit a Mini in his Jeep and democracies have somehow survived despite making appalling cars.
No one has mentioned the Morris Marina yet either.
Quite a diverse thread 
John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

"... Quite a diverse thread".

Democratic 

MM


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 27, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> If you need to ask then you just don't get it.



Oh believe me, I have driven an old and a new one. They are fun little cars, but they are just not my thing. I need lots of space and stowage room.


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> "... Quite a diverse thread".
> 
> Democratic
> 
> MM



On the money there Michael and probably nicely sums it all up.

John


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 27, 2011)

The new Mini's in the states... well... aren't really that mini anymore.


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

Matt308 said:


> The new Mini's in the states... well... aren't really that mini anymore.



True, the BMW MINI like my S is a different car to the original. The clever bit is carrying over the basic concept and style to appeal to a new generation of buyer. BMW us have done a superb job. The handling is almost without compare on twisty roads and the S performance has upped the stakes to a real pocket rocket.
Agreed, its not very practical but, its fun with a capital F.
We have other cars for the kids dogs etc, The S is mine.
John


----------



## Njaco (Nov 27, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> The prototype Landrover was built on a jeep chassis but that's about it. As for it being the only decent Brit car, have you ever driven a Mini? Other than flying, it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!



Nawww, I'll stick wit my LandRover!!!


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

Njaco said:


> Nawww, I'll stick wit my LandRover!!!



A snorkel kit may help you wade in deep water !
Have Landie .... go anywhere 

John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> As compared to say the Anzacs



Nah, we're not ambivalent about our own countries, but about each other's; that's different! Well, I can't say too much; I really enjoyed living in Australia as a teenager. Surfer's Paradise beaches, alcohol, scantily clad girls; hard life... 

On the subject of Landrover, I heard recently that the British army were replacing their Landrovers with Nissan Serenas!


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> On the subject of Landrover, I heard recently that the British army were replacing their Landrovers with Nissan Serenas!



haha..au contraire Grant. The British army will only use the ultimate off roader out Land Rover...although it hardly qualifies as 100% British these days. Like anything else we had that we of value.. it was sold. 

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

Morris Marina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


ANY country that has this piece of junk inflicted on it and not go into civil war must be democratically stable.

The ultimate test of democracy is the humble Morris Marina.

I rest my case gentlemen.

John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

Democratic vehicles in my life, last weekend .... black (94) has 460, 000. Red (97) 283,000. 

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Democratic vehicles in my life, last weekend .... black (94) has 460, 000. Red (97) 283,000.
> 
> MM



Huge miles Michael. Keep changing the oil and they go on forever.
They look just the job for your big country,
Snow already?
John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

Come and gone .. those are ks not miles


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Democratic vehicles in my life, last weekend .... black (94) has 460, 000. Red (97) 283,000.
> 
> MM


nice Fiats


----------



## Readie (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> View attachment 184734
> 
> 
> Come and gone .. those are ks not miles[/QUOT
> ...


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

"... nice Fiats".

Best value Fiat got in the purchase ....

MM


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 27, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Democratic vehicles in my life, last weekend .... black (94) has 460, 000. Red (97) 283,000.
> 
> MM



Nice Grand Cherokee. I had a 95 Grand Cherokee Limited with the 5.2 V8. It had 200,000 on it before I finally got my new one. Loved that car.



pbfoot said:


> nice Fiats



Naw those were made before Fiat bought Chrysler. Fortunately Fiat has already stated they are going to leave Jeep alone.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 27, 2011)

The black is one of the few made with _manual transmission _... and of course the red one has manual.

MM


----------



## parsifal (Nov 27, 2011)

Readie said:


> Morris Marina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> ANY country that has this piece of junk inflicted on it and not go into civil war must be democratically stable.
> ...



That is about the best way to put this that I have seen.

excelllently put john


----------



## parsifal (Nov 27, 2011)

Readie said:


> Morris Marina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> ANY country that has this piece of junk inflicted on it and not go into civil war must be democratically stable.
> ...




You cannot forget that memorable piece of british engineering, the Leyland P-76.

My engineer brother reckons that the trouble with Brit cars was not that they couldn't build an oil seal to keep out trouble (though thats my opinion), rather, that they did not incorporate planned obsolesence like the Japanese do. Eveything was designed to be fixed, or replaced, but everything wore out at a different rate.....result.....a vehicle that would leak oil allover your driveway AND continually break down because stuff broke at a different rates to each other....one day you had a broken uni joint, the next day an oil seal to the gearbox is gone, but just the week before it was fine......very frustrating... I remember doing three separate slave cylinders in a month, even though ecah time the mechanic checked all of them and said just one needed replacing...... 

(signed)

Proud (former) owner of an Austin Healey Sprite MkIII.....1986-99. and acquirer of the last known new stroker crank for the 1275cc engine in Australia.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 27, 2011)

Cars in the UK were never built for North America they were the wrong car for the wrong place


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 27, 2011)

Just like American cars don't work in the UK - parking spaces are too small for them, roads are too twisty for suspensions optimized for long distance comfort, and they consume too much petrol compared to smaller cars typically found on UK roads.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 27, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> Just like American cars don't work in the UK - parking spaces are too small for them, roads are too twisty for suspensions optimized for long distance comfort, and they consume too much petrol compared to smaller cars typically found on UK roads.


The cars were not of any use in winter. No heat no defrost and they just seem to rot away at accelerated speeds with salted roads they were also very labour intensive. Myself I've for the most part always driven sub compacts since 68 after my 66 Mustang (Piece of Crap) accidentily fell in the river so its not at all the size that matters but reliability


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 27, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> Myself I've for the most part always driven sub compacts since 68 after my 66 Mustang (Piece of Crap) accidentily fell in the river so its not at all the size that matters but reliability



Alright... I'll bite. How does a perfectly good car "fall in the river"?


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 27, 2011)

Matt308 said:


> Alright... I'll bite. How does a perfectly good car "fall in the river"?


Was young , there was a party down by the river the parking brake didn't take and it rolled over a 30ft cliff into a 100' of water with a 15mph current , now this left me with payments and no car . The statute of limitations is long gone now and the thief nor car was ever recovered.


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> Morris Marina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> ANY country that has this piece of junk inflicted on it and not go into civil war must be democratically stable.
> ...



I had two of these John, first was a coupe which served it purpose the second an estate which developed spider web paintwork as well as a number of mechanical problems, the final straw was the gearstick coming away in my hand one afternoon on the way home from work.


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> so its not at all the size that matters but reliability



Agreed Neil, According to JD Power and the British 'Which Car' surveys if you want a reliable motor you have to buy Japanese.
Toyota rules the roost in the Aussie outback where reliability gets serious.
Jeep and Land Rover have a very poor reputation in Europe. I wonder if the Jeep's made in the States are better than the exported ones?
John


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

Vic Balshaw said:


> I had two of these John, first was a coupe which served it purpose the second an estate which developed spider web paintwork as well as a number of mechanical problems, the final straw was the gearstick coming away in my hand on afternoon on the way home from work.



I had a 1.8 Super Saloon mk1 and a 1.3 Super Saloon mk2 as well Vic. The pluses were easy and cheap to repair, fairly reliable if you kept up with the servicing and liberally used WD40. The minuses were constant rust, horrendous understeer, axle tramp and things that came off in your hand. My front seat back snapped off...made for an interesting drive.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

parsifal said:


> You cannot forget that memorable piece of british engineering, the Leyland P-76.
> 
> My engineer brother reckons that the trouble with Brit cars was not that they couldn't build an oil seal to keep out trouble (though thats my opinion), rather, that they did not incorporate planned obsolesence like the Japanese do. Eveything was designed to be fixed, or replaced, but everything wore out at a different rate.....result.....a vehicle that would leak oil allover your driveway AND continually break down because stuff broke at a different rates to each other....one day you had a broken uni joint, the next day an oil seal to the gearbox is gone, but just the week before it was fine......very frustrating... I remember doing three separate slave cylinders in a month, even though ecah time the mechanic checked all of them and said just one needed replacing......
> 
> ...



The Marina was British Leyland trying to do a Ford number, ie sell very basic cars instead of the technically clever cars like the 1100/1300, Mini, Maxi etc that they produced historically.

BL failed where Ford succeed and became a laughing stock.

Ah, oil leaks. My project cars are always A series as I like the character of the unit. But, oil tight? I have never succeed. The usual culprit is the gear rod seal at the bottom of the gearbox.

The stroker crank was a rare find !

John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

Cars are a huge symbol of "Democracy" ..... Henry knew that if his workers couldn't afford his cars there was no future for the industry. Once that principle was in-play America began to re-invent itself around the car and it became _a necessity_ (due to distance and scale)

In the UK after WW1 there was a huge pent-up demand for a "new" system which the debt and the depression pretty much dampened. But after WW2 the first act of the British public was to throw out the wartime government and its leader and go Labour ..... with all the hopes that come/came with that. The British sentiment was pretty much the sentiment all across Western Europe ... understandably hoping for more peaceful, more equitable, more prosperous times. Cars for the masses were an important element in that consumer wet-dream. But only the Germans, IMHO, (Peugeot and Citroen, maybe, ) really knew how to build reliable, affordable cars for the market. Driving your Ford Prefect, Fiat or Renault on the weekend with the Missus .. and polishing it lovingly each night and tweeking the tappets isn't that same as routinely driving from Toronto to Florida (none stop) or blasting from Chamonix to Barcelona on the autoroutes (my niece in a Peugot diesel).

"... Jeep and Land Rover have a very poor reputation in Europe. I wonder if the Jeep's made in the States are better than the exported"

Don't think so ... but I had a colleague - a Brit - who worked in Brussels and used to drive flat-out to Paris twice a week in a 1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee ( 4.0 L, 200 hp push rod engine with hydraulic lifters). Needless to say the Jeep didn't like being driven at high revs like that constantly .... it liked to turn 2000 rpm at 110.  and will do that forever.

Proud Jeep Lover

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

Mobility and independence are treasures as you rightly say Michael.
The pre-war designs that were offered in the 1950's scarred a generation.It took a quantum leap to get Joe Average mobile in the UK. The Minor, Anglia Mini played that role. Tinkering on a Sunday afternoon ? Its a tradition that has been lost with fuel injection and ECU's.
I think your perception of French cars is er....adventurous. They are either bizarre or bread and butter basic fare. But, the French buy them and I suppose that says something ( does it?). I wish that the British were as loyal to our own cars as the French are to theirs. Up to about 1970 buying anything other than a British motor was seen as either eccentric ( French) or deeply unpatriotic ( German) or mad ( Dutch DAF). USA cars were just too flash vulgar for us.
My experiences with Renault Peugeot have varied from a joke to fun. 'Fun' being constant problems but, good when it worked. A 205 CTi in my case. 'Joke' was a 4TL.
The German reliability record is not as good as you may think with expensive unexpected problems occurring. Bit like Honda's turbo and cam chain woes. But,the build quality is good there is an undeniable feel good factor in VW, Audi Mercedes.
Chrysler cars are seen as a left field choice here and dealers are few and far between. I wanted to get a Jeep Patriot last year but, the acres of ill fitting trim put me off. Quite an imposing vehicle but, I'd be better off with a Toyota Surf.
I know people love their Cherokees and the LPG conversion is popular here. Hammering a big 4WD as you describe is not what they were designed for.
The Japanese have seen off our motorbike industry and done a good job with our car industry too. Most people just want a car that works 24/7. Enter the bland Toyota Corolla.

But, people 'vote' with their wallet as indeed we vote in the election.

So, is the Corolla the ultimate car of democracy?

John


----------



## parsifal (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> The Marina was British Leyland trying to do a Ford number, ie sell very basic cars instead of the technically clever cars like the 1100/1300, Mini, Maxi etc that they produced historically.
> 
> BL failed where Ford succeed and became a laughing stock.
> 
> ...




For me the epitomy of british motoring were its sports cars. I always loved the Sprites, but a good Jaguar, or Aston Martin, Morgan or Lotus......you cant beat them. not that they were the fastest, or the best, just had a certain class about them.

My Sprite was a bucket of bits when I got it. An exracing machine. was mildly worked, but I reconditioned and balanced the engine. 1275cc bored out to about 1370 I think, huge over sized valves (like the old Coopers), double valve springs. 40mm SU carbs, 4 of them, flat pistons, and the stroker crank, a slightly worked camshaft, 4 bolt main bearings to hold the camshaft in place (why on earth did the brits only have 3 main bearings with just two studs per bearing. Straightened exhaust with extractors. I put different gear ratios in to the gearbox, they dsaid I should have put 5 speed gearbox in but I didnt. Reco power brakes system, sway bars front and back, slip diff. A fully reconditioned body and re- upholstered. She pured like a kitten (straight through twin exhaust 9fitted after the photosd). Could get to 0-60 in about 8 seconds from memory. Top speed was about 108mph, could sustain about 95). Would rev out to about 8500 rpm with very little valve bounce.


My best trip was from Canberra to Sydney (roughly a four hour trip, although we did it in two this night). Just outside of Canberra, nosed up against an Alpha Spyder. Thought this will be easy......took off from the light, and left him in my wake. In straight line speed , hillclimbing, and accelaration I had it all over this guy, but he could beat me in the corners....those things are on rails i tell you. 

We battled it out for two hours , neither one could get the advantage....sometimes it was me, sometmes him. As we entered SAydney, he was slightly in front, but he slowed down, and we entered the city in line abreast. It was the best street episode I ever was stupid enough to get involved in.

If cars are a reflection of a nations democracy, I reckon this was the symbol of British freedom......completely impractical, a real pain in the a**** to maintain, but a joy to ride in 


Now i drive a safe, practical Subaru........


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

In Canada - Honda (Civic) sells best year-over-year - and Honda manufactures it locally.

"... acres of ill fitting trim put me off ..."

Fit and finish are more important to some than others ... like bespoke vs off-the-peg. But when its -20 and there's 10 inches of fresh snow .... fit and finish won't get the job done.

Nice Midget, Parsifal. Your road-racing saga sounds like an Australian version of Hot Rod Lincoln and the Coup de Ville ----- Maybelline ---- why can't you be truuuuue --- oh Maybelline ----

(just scared the cat)

MM


----------



## parsifal (Nov 28, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> Nice Midget, Parsifal. Your road-racing saga sounds like an Australian version of Hot Rod Lincoln and the Coup de Ville ----- Maybelline ---- why can't you be truuuuue --- oh Maybelline ----
> 
> (just scared the cat)
> 
> MM




i know why the cat was startled....he must know thats no MG, its an Austin Healey Sprite.....thats like calling a hurricane a sort of spitfire.........


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> Jeep and Land Rover have a very poor reputation in Europe. I wonder if the Jeep's made in the States are better than the exported ones?
> John



Funny, I have never been left stranded by a Jeep. Of course both of mine are US built ones. 

My 1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited, never had a problem with it. 200,000 miles before I finally had one and then decided to buy another one. The 2005 that I have has 63,000 miles on it, and has never a problem with it.

In fact Jeep is the only thing that my family has owned. We had a 1986 Jeep Comanche, 1988 Jeep Cherokee, 1993 Jeep Grand Cherokee. It is all I will ever buy. I can drive though any kind of terrain, and I have all the space and comfort that I could ever ask for.



michaelmaltby said:


> Proud Jeep Lover



Damn straight! 

Jeep there is only one!

(Wow we really have taken a turn with this thread haven't we?)


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

".... Jeep there is only one!"

Agreed. 

"... (Wow we really have taken a turn with this thread haven't we?)

Disagree. 

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

Clearly, Democracy is NOT Over-rated. 

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

parsifal said:


> For me the epitomy of british motoring were its sports cars. I always loved the Sprites, but a good Jaguar, or Aston Martin, Morgan or Lotus......you cant beat them. not that they were the fastest, or the best, just had a certain class about them.
> 
> My Sprite was a bucket of bits when I got it. An exracing machine. was mildly worked, but I reconditioned and balanced the engine. 1275cc bored out to about 1370 I think, huge over sized valves (like the old Coopers), double valve springs. 40mm SU carbs, 4 of them, flat pistons, and the stroker crank, a slightly worked camshaft, 4 bolt main bearings to hold the camshaft in place (why on earth did the brits only have 3 main bearings with just two studs per bearing. Straightened exhaust with extractors. I put different gear ratios in to the gearbox, they dsaid I should have put 5 speed gearbox in but I didnt. Reco power brakes system, sway bars front and back, slip diff. A fully reconditioned body and re- upholstered. She pured like a kitten (straight through twin exhaust 9fitted after the photosd). Could get to 0-60 in about 8 seconds from memory. Top speed was about 108mph, could sustain about 95). Would rev out to about 8500 rpm with very little valve bounce.
> 
> ...





parsifal said:


> For me the epitomy of british motoring were its sports cars. I always loved the Sprites, but a good Jaguar, or Aston Martin, Morgan or Lotus......you cant beat them. not that they were the fastest, or the best, just had a certain class about them.
> 
> My Sprite was a bucket of bits when I got it. An exracing machine. was mildly worked, but I reconditioned and balanced the engine. 1275cc bored out to about 1370 I think, huge over sized valves (like the old Coopers), double valve springs. 40mm SU carbs, 4 of them, flat pistons, and the stroker crank, a slightly worked camshaft, 4 bolt main bearings to hold the camshaft in place (why on earth did the brits only have 3 main bearings with just two studs per bearing. Straightened exhaust with extractors. I put different gear ratios in to the gearbox, they dsaid I should have put 5 speed gearbox in but I didnt. Reco power brakes system, sway bars front and back, slip diff. A fully reconditioned body and re- upholstered. She pured like a kitten (straight through twin exhaust 9fitted after the photosd). Could get to 0-60 in about 8 seconds from memory. Top speed was about 108mph, could sustain about 95). Would rev out to about 8500 rpm with very little valve bounce.
> 
> ...



Epitomy of British sports cars? Austin Healey 3000. A proper mans car.

That's a good spec on your Sprite. Did you get a steel crank as well?
I must admit I haven't seen 4 40mm SU's on a 1370 A series before. Twin DCOE 40 ( 45) or twin big SU's but not 4. That is some carburation Michael.

I had a 1976 Escort Mk2 Mexico with a 2.1 Pinto with a race cam, big valve head and single 45 DCOE that I used for rallies hillclimbs in the 1980's. I never liked the Pinto and planned to build an all steel 1700 Kent or 1300 Kent as they were lighter and would rev like f***.
People were starting to put twin cam Fiat engines in Fords as that was the cheapist way to get nearer BD power.

Great days and great cars.

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Funny, I have never been left stranded by a Jeep. Of course both of mine are US built ones.
> 
> My 1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited, never had a problem with it. 200,000 miles before I finally had one and then decided to buy another one. The 2005 that I have has 63,000 miles on it, and has never a problem with it.
> 
> ...




So, I need a 4WD to tow and carry with. Land Rovers are too unreliable and from what you Michael are saying Jeep's seem good.
Which model year is best?
I'm not worried about age etc. So, if a 1990 Jeep is US built and better than say a 2000 model then I'd rather have the 1990.
Manual or Auto?
Diesel or Petrol?

Serious question, and any sensible advice welcomed

John


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> So, I need a 4WD to tow and carry with. Land Rovers are too unreliable and from what you Michael are saying Jeep's seem good.
> Which model year is best?
> I'm not worried about age etc. So, if a 1990 Jeep is US built and better than say a 2000 model then I'd rather have the 1990.
> Manual or Auto?
> ...



Of course you don't need 4WD to tow and have space, but having 4WD is nice when the weather turns to crap in the winter. I cut through 40+ cm of snow last winter like it was butter. 

As for reliability of Jeeps, I think that the 90s and 80s Jeeps were the best. Like I said, I never had one quit on me. In the early 2000s the Jeeps started having a problem with reliability (go figure, Chrysler was owned by Diamler...). Since about 2005 they have gotten much better again, and the new 2011 is supposed to be the Jeep that is going to save the SUV market.

All of my Jeeps have been automatics, but obviously there are advantages to Manuals. Diesel is much better on gas, but I find that the Petrol (V6 or V8) have much more power.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

Any Chrysler-built Cherokee with the push-rod straight six 4.0 liter (no timing belts) + manual 5-speed. The Grand Cherokee is a nicer ride (coils in the back end) but I'm guessing there are more older Cherokees on the road than Grand Cherokees where you are.

My first Cherokee (December, 1983) was Renault-built (in Ohio). It was what sold me on Jeep, BUT, some components were just unreliable (hydraulic clutch cylinders, alternators). The motor was the GM 2.5 liter Hurricane 4 cylinder. Aspirated. Kept it until 1994 and sold it with 444,000 ks.

MM


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

Thanks Chris Michael.
I'll have a look out for the Jeeps you recommend.
Cheers
John


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 28, 2011)

With Jeep, you either love them or hate them. I have not found anyone in the middle. I love them...


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> With Jeep, you either love them or hate them. I have not found anyone in the middle. I love them...



I haven't got an axe to grind either way. I just want a tough, reliable 4WD with a bit of grunt.
Jeep has the heritage and I have spotted a Wrangler soft top that is local to me.
John


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 28, 2011)

I tow with a 82 Jeep J-10, sometimes use it to carry firewood out of some mountain trails. 360 V8 and manual.

I've got a 66 AMC American station wagon i've put a 4.0 from a 90 Cherokee and 5spd from a Mustang, fun little car. My grandkids love it.


----------



## Readie (Nov 28, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I tow with a 82 Jeep J-10, sometimes use it to carry firewood out of some mountain trails. 360 V8 and manual.



Big Pick up. Looks the business !
John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

"... I have spotted a Wrangler soft top that is local to me"

That will work.

MM


----------



## parsifal (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> Epitomy of British sports cars? Austin Healey 3000. A proper mans car.
> 
> That's a good spec on your Sprite. Did you get a steel crank as well?
> I must admit I haven't seen 4 40mm SU's on a 1370 A series before. Twin DCOE 40 ( 45) or twin big SU's but not 4. That is some carburation Michael.
> ...



Actually my memory fails me, it was twin SUs (thats two carbs.....still a lot of carburettor)


----------



## Njaco (Nov 28, 2011)

Readie said:


> So, I need a 4WD to tow and carry with. *Land Rovers are too unreliable *and from what you Michael are saying Jeep's seem good.
> 
> 
> Serious question, and any sensible advice welcomed
> ...




Well, I never had any problems with my LR the 11 years I owned - then again I had the 4 banger replaced witha Chevy 250. 

and I didn't always have a LR - I love Jeeps just as much. This is my '76 CJ-7 with my kids in a Marine Corps Toys-4-Tots parade I did.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 28, 2011)

I would love to have a CJ-7. As a Jeep lover, I want my Grand Cherokee as a family vehicle, but I want an old CJ-7 as my weekend fun car. Go out and do some off-roading with it. Eventually I want an old Willys Jeep as well.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

"... 66 AMC American station wagon i've put a 4.0 from a 90 Cherokee and ..."

IIRC the origin of that motor is the old AMC Ambassador ... so AMC just naturally turned to that motor for the GC just before they were sold to Chrysler by Renault. And Chrysler got good service from it, too. Ah history.

Great story


MM


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 28, 2011)

So...we've taken 12 pages allegedly talking about whether democracy has a pulse when, in reality, we've mostly been talking about cars (again!). Does that mean democracy _is_ dead?

(Did you see how I did that? Segued right back onto topic! Is there no end to my talents?...On second thoughts, don't answer that last question!!!)


----------



## Njaco (Nov 28, 2011)

buffnut453 said:


> So...we've taken 12 pages allegedly talking about whether democracy has a pulse when, in reality, we've mostly been talking about cars (again!). Does that mean democracy _is_ dead?
> 
> (Did you see how I did that? Segued right back onto topic! Is there no end to my talents?...On second thoughts, don't answer that last question!!!)



I guess that answers the question. DEmocracy is not dead as it wouldn't have allowed us to discuss the last 12 pages the way we did if it was.


----------



## parsifal (Nov 28, 2011)

Democracy is a Chev Corvette on Route 66 with the top down and the engine purring. 

Its very much alive


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

"... Segued right back onto topic!"

Wow - you *own* a Segue 

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

But .... in all honesty -- I'm disappointed with the response ... This thread was posed as a serious question - factoring in various ethnic, geographic and tribal "differences".

I had hoped that some pure soul, likely a Nordic, 'Lucky' comes to mind actually, would leap to the debate in defense of tribal inclusiveness and hedonism in response to genetic solidarity.

Sadly, it hasn't hit its mark. But the thread demonstrates that 'cars' like 'water' always seeks its/their own level.

Personally, from a human-management perspective (delivery of services) and a health-happiness perspective (contentedness), GOOD government doesn't have to be democratic to be GOOD (as in honest and effective). But it is damn hard to pull this off without the luxury of free speech, free association, ACCOUNTABILITY and TRANSPARENCY. We in Canada are wrestling with this challenge as we try to come to terms with our First Nations Peoples and the rules and laws that govern their daily lives and inter-action with ours. (For example: Tribe members don't know what their are Chiefs paid)

I think we over sell democracy when we enter into arenas like Afghanistan or Iraq. The very most we can hope for when we 'insert ourselves' is that we refuse to knowingly participate in CORRUPTION. Corruption is the enemy of democratic process -- a far larger threat to democracy than communism ever was - INHO. 

Competent democracies are to be cherished.

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

"... Democracy is a Chev Corvette on Route 66 with the top down and the engine purring. "  

In June, 1971, for me (solo), it was a new red Datsun 2000 sportster with just a tonneau cover and Pirellis . Ottawa-New Orleans- Monterey Mex-Mazatlan Mex- Nogales AZ-Ottawa ..... in 14 days. Great, long stroke, push-rod 2 liter iron block motor - Datsun built, German-inspired, IIFC. I learned later that these were quite common in Oz, Parsifal. The platform was common with the Datsun pick-up of the time ... with radial tires it handled like a rail-car .

MM


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 28, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> I think we over sell democracy when we enter into arenas like Afghanistan or Iraq. The very most we can hope for when we 'insert ourselves' is that we refuse to knowingly participate in CORRUPTION. Corruption is the enemy of democratic process -- a far larger threat to democracy than communism ever was - INHO.



I thought some of my responses were really quite good (which, being a humble Brit, roughly translates into "Bloody brilliant!").

However, I agree with the West overselling democracy...or at least our version(s) of it. I'd far rather nations decide for themselves how to institute honest, representative governance so that it meets their needs. Western imperialism is long-dead, but we still think we have a right to tell other countries how to govern themselves. If anything, the recent uprisings in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere have shown that even hostile dictatorial regimes can be undone by the will of the people...and that HAS to be a good thing for the future of global democracy!


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 28, 2011)

"... the recent uprisings in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere have shown that even hostile dictatorial regimes can be undone by the will of the people...and that HAS to be a good thing for the future of global democracy!"

I agree. It is far more important that people involve themselves in some form of government - than that it be 'western approved' government.

MM


----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 28, 2011)

That's the whole problem with democratic government - too much bluddy politics. It's not enough that nations decide for themselves how they should be governed...it also has to agree with OUR sense of what's democratic, preferably in such a way that we can self-righteously proclaim that we saved the poor people from themselves and hence delude ourselves that they'll forever be in our debt.


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 28, 2011)

Unfortunately for those countries that wish to impose their democratic will on others, no country that has had democracy thrust upon it by the West has actually survived and continued as a democracy. With countries like Afganistan and Iraq, there has been so much foreign intervention in their past that the people have never really had the chance to decide for themselves.



> But .... in all honesty -- I'm disappointed with the response ... This thread was posed as a serious question - factoring in various ethnic, geographic and tribal "differences".



Mike, I disagree, I think this thread has been quite successful and I think all of us have enjoyed throwing in our two cents, pence, pesetas etc on the subject. In terms of the latter, ethnic and tribal democracy doesn't exist. By nature, tribal societies operate in a strict feudal hierarchy. The trick is to incorporate their needs into government. Personally, I would have liked to have seen more discussions about what democratic system of government works in what environment, but that's just me.

Toyota Camry and Hilux... Democracy _at work_. Just turn a blind eye to scenes of rebels in far off civil war stricken Third World nations driving about in Hiluxes carrying RPG-7s in the back...


----------



## wuzak (Nov 28, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> I think we over sell democracy when we enter into arenas like Afghanistan or Iraq. The very most we can hope for when we 'insert ourselves' is that we refuse to knowingly participate in CORRUPTION. Corruption is the enemy of democratic process -- a far larger threat to democracy than communism ever was - INHO.
> 
> Competent democracies are to be cherished.



Corruption is an issue in democracies now. Let's face it, governments have huge contracts to give out, and with that amount of money on the line corruption will inevitably rear its ugly head. 

The problem I see with a lot of politicians is that they only ever seem to set policy for near term goals - ie getting themselves or their party re-elected to power.

Corruption was also an issue in Communist countries, and is partly why those systems didn't work.

The uprisings in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia show that when the people want change they will attempt to do somethiong about it.


----------



## parsifal (Nov 28, 2011)

I agree with Churchill in his address to the comons in 1947, when he said:

_Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time._ 
Speech in the House of Commons (1947-11-11)
The Official Report, House of Commons (5th Series), 11 November 1947, vol. 444, cc. 206–07

The alternatives are pretty terrible, On fascism he said in 1938

_People say we ought not to allow ourselves to be drawn into a theoretical antagonism between Nazidom and democracy; but the antagonism is here now. It is this very conflict of spiritual and moral ideas which gives the free countries a great part of their strength. You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police. On all sides they are guarded by masses of armed men, cannons, aeroplanes, fortifications, and the like — they boast and vaunt themselves before the world, yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts; words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home — all the more powerful because forbidden — terrify them. A little mouse of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic. They make frantic efforts to bar our thoughts and words; they are afraid of the workings of the human mind. Cannons, airplanes, they can manufacture in large quantities; but how are they to quell the natural promptings of human nature, which after all these centuries of trial and progress has inherited a whole armoury of potent and indestructible knowledge?_ 

Winston Churchill, in "The Defence of Freedom and Peace (The Lights are Going Out)", radio broadcast to the United States and to London (16 October 1938)

I cannot express my position better than the great man himself. And these wordws are as true in out time as they were in his


----------



## tyrodtom (Nov 28, 2011)

I can think of two countries that had democracy ( of a sort ) thrust upon them by the west, and they still survive. Germany and Japan.

But they had to be almost destroyed to do it.

Can anyone think of a benevolent dictatorship ?


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 29, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I can think of two countries that had democracy ( of a sort ) thrust upon them by the west, and they still survive. Germany and Japan. But they had to be almost destroyed to do it.



Good point tyrodtom, but not really the same. The Allies did not go to war with a specific mandate to impose democracy on either Japan or Germany. Also, neither Germany nor Japan had a choice. Between 1945 and 1989 Germany was simultaneously governed by a socialist dictatorship.


----------



## wuzak (Nov 29, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I can think of two countries that had democracy ( of a sort ) thrust upon them by the west, and they still survive. Germany and Japan.
> 
> But they had to be almost destroyed to do it.
> 
> Can anyone think of a benevolent dictatorship ?



Germany had a democracy before 1933. Hitler came to power as a result of the failure to form a majority government during elections in 1932.

Can't get more democratic than a hung parliament!


----------



## wuzak (Nov 29, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> I can think of two countries that had democracy ( of a sort ) thrust upon them by the west, and they still survive. Germany and Japan. But they had to be almost destroyed to do it.


 


nuuumannn said:


> Good point tyrodtom, but not really the same. The Allies did not go to war with a specific mandate to impose democracy on either Japan or Germany. Also, neither Germany nor Japan had a choice. Between 1945 and 1989 Germany was simultaneously governed by a socialist dictatorship.


 
It would be fair to say that neither the Iraq war or the Afghanistan war were started with the goal of imposing democracy or freeing the people. If that was the stated aim of the wars it would create a difficult precedent - there other dictators around the world that could do with being removed.


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

wuzak said:


> It would be fair to say that neither the Iraq war or the Afghanistan war were started with the goal of imposing democracy or freeing the people. If that was the stated aim of the wars it would create a difficult precedent - there other dictators around the world that could do with being removed.



Yes, and before Iraq etc we ignored and even encouraged quite a few dictatorships around the world for our own ends.
Western Polices are usually rather cynical.
John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 29, 2011)

wuzak said:


> It would be fair to say that neither the Iraq war or the Afghanistan war were started with the goal of imposing democracy or freeing the people. If that was the stated aim of the wars it would create a difficult precedent - there other dictators around the world that could do with being removed.



I would have to argue that point. The USA went to war in Iraq and Afganistan to find the fabled WMD and to rid these countries of Al Qaeda and Taleban influence, so we have been told, thus freeing the population from the tyranny that these organisations imposed. Obviously there was no link to Al Qaeda in Iraq, nor was there any WMD, therefore the (real) reason was to depose Saddam Hussain. Do you think that the USA intended on putting in another dictatorship in his regime's place, or a democratically elected government?

Yes, there most certainly are other dictators the US and its allies would like to take a pop at, but its not that simple; in Iraq and Afganistan there was a UN resolution that supported an invasion. 

John, I cynically agree with you; Saddam was one of these dictators. Arguably his existence created an element of stability to the region and provided an antagonist to Iran, which gave the US something to smile about after the failure of Eagle Claw and the Iran Contra scandal.


----------



## wuzak (Nov 29, 2011)

nuuumannn said:


> I would have to argue that point. The USA went to war in Iraq and Afganistan to find the fabled WMD and to rid these countries of Al Qaeda and Taleban influence, so we have been told, thus freeing the population from the tyranny that these organisations imposed. Obviously there was no link to Al Qaeda in Iraq, nor was there any WMD, therefore the (real) reason was to depose Saddam Hussain. Do you think that the USA intended on putting in another dictatorship in his regime's place, or a democratically elected government?
> 
> Yes, there most certainly are other dictators the US and its allies would like to take a pop at, but its not that simple; in Iraq and Afganistan there was a UN resolution that supported an invasion.
> 
> John, I cynically agree with you; Saddam was one of these dictators. Arguably his existence created an element of stability to the region and provided an antagonist to Iran, which gave the US something to smile about after the failure of Eagle Claw and the Iran Contra scandal.



I don't think that Afghanistan was to depose the Taliban. Rather it was a reponse to 9/11 and aimed at detroying Al Qaeda and capturing Bin Laden. 

Wiki Says: 


> The stated objectives of the invasion were; end the Hussein regime; eliminate whatever weapons of mass destruction could be found; eliminate whatever Islamist militants could be found; obtain intelligence on militant networks; distribute humanitarian aid; *secure Iraq's petroleum infrastructure*; and assist in creating a *representative but compliant government* as a model for other Middle East nations.



I think the main objective was the petroleum infrastructure. Interesting that they used the word "compliant" when referring to the government they wanted to create. 

There was no UN resolution to invade Iraq. That would need the Security Council to agree, and with China and Russia opposed that could not occur. In fact the UN has labelled the Iraq invasion as illegal.

I also don't think that the war planners thought very far ahead.


So, it was partly to do with ending Hussein's reign.


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

Back to Jeeps for a mo...

I have been wondering why I don't see too many on the roads here.


I reckon its the road tax (emission based) that penalises big low tech engines that are great..but not 'green'.

A Jeep will cost £460 per year in the UK which equals :-
$740 Canadian dollars
$720 USA dollars
E536 Euros.

Then you put the fuel in... 
The UK has the seventh highest petrol price in Europe and the second highest diesel price.

Does Canada / USA Germany have such 'road tax' costs?

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

wuzak said:


> I don't think that Afghanistan was to depose the Taliban. Rather it was a reponse to 9/11 and aimed at detroying Al Qaeda and capturing Bin Laden.
> 
> Wiki Says:
> 
> ...




Go back even further and look at the regimes of horror that 'we' did nothing about.

Pol Pot in Cambodia
Idi Amin in Uganda
Josip Tito in Yugoslavia
Laurent Gbagbo in the Ivory Coast

The thing that these despots did not have was oil and it was politically convenient to look the other way.

This man had oil... King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and we still looked away.

Edit: Chris the the mods team. This is my only post on this subject. I felt it had to be said before we get on the moral high ground.

John


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

I reckon its the road tax (emission based) that penalises big low tech engines that are great..but not 'green'.

A Jeep will cost £460 per year in the UK which equals :-
$740 Canadian dollars
$720 USA dollars
E536 Euros.

No ...not quite. Gas is presently *CDN$1.19* per liter and vehicle licenses are pro-rated by engine size (in cylinders), Vehicles of a certain age must pass emission standards before being licensed every 2 years (on the owner's birthday). 

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

"... Corruption was also an issue in Communist countries, and is partly why those systems didn't work."

I agree. Corruption (like the Mafia) is a social acid that destroys the integrity of the system - any system. The Soviets had a complete parallel economy running ..... dolls within dolls, so to speak. 

MM

@Nuuumannn - I was being a bit over-the-top with my tribal inclusiveness, genetic solidarity schtick


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> I reckon its the road tax (emission based) that penalises big low tech engines that are great..but not 'green'.
> 
> A Jeep will cost £460 per year in the UK which equals :-
> $740 Canadian dollars
> ...



$119 dollars per litre?

There is talk of making the emission vehicle test ( the dreaded MOT) bi yearly...but,for now its an annual event and passing it is hard and getting harder. The number of useable vehicle that fail on emissions would make your eyes water....
Mind you 12 months MOT adds a lot of value to an older vehicle.
John


----------



## nuuumannn (Nov 29, 2011)

wuzak said:


> I don't think that Afghanistan was to depose the Taliban. Rather it was a reponse to 9/11 and aimed at detroying Al Qaeda and capturing Bin Laden.



And these too from Wiki: 

"The War in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001,[35] as the armed forces of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Australia, and the Afghan United Front (Northern Alliance) launched Operation Enduring Freedom. The primary driver of the invasion was the September 11 attacks on the United States, with the stated goal of dismantling the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization and ending its use of Afghanistan as a base. *The United States also said that it would remove the Taliban regime from power and create a viable democratic state*."

"Following the invasion, the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its nuclear, chemical, and biological programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion but that Iraq intended to resume production once sanctions were lifted. Although some degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned chemical weapons from before 1991 were found, they were not the weapons which had been the main argument to justify the invasion. Some U.S. officials also accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein of harboring and supporting al-Qaeda, but no evidence of a meaningful connection was ever found. Other reasons for the invasion given by the governments of the attacking countries included Iraq's financial support for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, Iraqi government human rights abuse, *and an effort to spread democracy to the country*."

So, I was right to state that invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan were to impose democracy on the population.



> There was no UN resolution to invade Iraq. That would need the Security Council to agree, and with China and Russia opposed that could not occur. In fact the UN has labelled the Iraq invasion as illegal. I also don't think that the war planners thought very far ahead. So, it was partly to do with ending Hussein's reign.



You got me there. Yes, the war planners got it so wrong, but they had an agenda of their own design to meet. I would state that overthrowing Hussein's rule was the biggest deciding factor behind the US led invasion.



> Nuuumannn - I was being a bit over-the-top with my tribal inclusiveness, genetic solidarity schtick



Hey Mike, sorry, didn't mean to be snippy; I had my grumpy undies on.

$119 dollars per litre? Time to dust off the ole push bike and get cycling, I think...


----------



## Njaco (Nov 29, 2011)

Readie, no problems. Its still fairly civil in here. I'm holding my tongue. If you check the old "Political" section I was very active in it but the Mods made a very, very good decision to remove political talk outside the realm of WWII. So far the thread has been smooth. 


But we are watching!


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

"... the Mods made a very, very good decision to remove political talk..."

The political "envelope" ? . My favorite envelope is the "ugly" envelope. Sunny is the custodian ....

MM


----------



## Njaco (Nov 29, 2011)




----------



## buffnut453 (Nov 29, 2011)

Re dictators who were "tolerated" by the West...as I inferred earlier, democracy often suffers from an excess of politics at the expense of sufficient morality. It's funny how often we are willing to accept dictatorships in countries that aren't sufficiently "interesting".

To expand on the "imposition" of democracy, I wasn't just thinking about Iraq and Afghanistan. However, to cover those specific conflicts first, I think both suffered from the same problem - we planned the war but failed to plan the peace. In neither case was it explicit that we would "impose" democracy on those nations, indeed that was never a stated objective, but it was obviously in the best interests of several nations to have governments in both Iraq and Afghanistan that were favourably disposed to the West. 

Aside from Iraq and Afghanistan, there are other examples of pressure, both political and financial, applied to governments who don't conform to western ideals of democracy. Sometimes that pressure is warranted because of blatant human rights issues or because the country is a demonstrable regional or global threat. However, there are many other occasions when the West turns a blind eye to atrocities which hurts democracy as, to the rest of the world, it seems we are hypocritical.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

Hey Njaco, I know you weren't too fond of my "quirk" reference in a parallel thread .... but .... it was said with great affection and sensitivity .... I refer you to this timely source for my inspiration. (I am not normally a big fan of high-brow magazines, but this is well written and hilariously funny, and my German friends like it too, )

It's the Economy, Dummkopf! | Business | Vanity Fair

MM


"... However, there are many other occasions when the West turns a blind eye to atrocities which hurts democracy ..."

He's a bast**d but he's *our* bast**d. It begs the case for Family Planning.


----------



## Njaco (Nov 29, 2011)

No offense taken. I have thick skin and head!

 That was good.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 29, 2011)

Readie said:


> Does Canada / USA Germany have such 'road tax' costs?



The Germans do, but I do not have to pay any of those due to the Status of Forces Agreement between the US and Germany. As for gas, I pay around 70 Euro cents for a litre of Super Unleaded Gas (98 octane).

I do have to pass the German emissions test though, but that is not a problem because the new Jeeps are all within tolerences.



Readie said:


> Edit: Chris the the mods team. This is my only post on this subject. I felt it had to be said before we get on the moral high ground.
> 
> John



No worries. I am just monitoring everyhing. As a veteran of the Iraq War I have my won beliefs based off of what I saw, but I am going to leave that out of this discussion because of the forums political policy.


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

Njaco said:


> Readie, no problems. Its still fairly civil in here. I'm holding my tongue. If you check the old "Political" section I was very active in it but the Mods made a very, very good decision to remove political talk outside the realm of WWII. So far the thread has been smooth.
> 
> 
> But we are watching!



Fair play Njaco.
I know you are too

John


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The Germans do, but I do not have to pay any of those due to the Status of Forces Agreement between the US and Germany. As for gas, I pay around 70 Euro cents for a litre of Super Unleaded Gas (98 octane).
> 
> I do have to pass the German emissions test though, but that is not a problem because the new Jeeps are all within tolerences.
> 
> ...


----------



## davparlr (Nov 29, 2011)

First, I address the topic. Democracy causes a softening of variations of government impact on the common people. All governments vary between good and bad. Totalitarian governments, when good, can be very good for people, but when it is bad it is intolerable. Usually, it tends to go to the bad side of the force. Democracies, when good, only tend to be just good because of bureaucratic inertia , but when it is bad, it tends to be replaced. So the transition between good and bad all revolve around some mean and not going in either direction very far.

Now to get to the fun topic, jeeps. My love for jeeps go very deep. My family had CJ2s (civilized WWII military jeeps) as I grew up. We used it as a farm tool, but mostly for fun. And fun we had, running the pristine white sand dunes of then mostly unpopulated Perdido Key, west of Pensacola, or plowing through the mud in the famous Florida swampland (yes, they will get stuck!). As a farm tool we plowed, they are not very good at it, too light, and other tasks. One of the things we did was pull stumps. We would wrap a chain around the stump, tie the other end to the jeep frame, lay excess chain on the ground, put the jeep into four wheel drive and floor the throttle. We would hit the end of the chain with a jolt. That jeep was practically indestructible, except for rust.

I also learned to drive in a jeep. My brother inherited it when he turned 16, it was totally cool. What did I get when I turned 16? A 1954 Ford four door, sigh. Anyway, it got me to school and to the beach, so I can't complain too much.

In the two pictures, you can see the old CJ2 (that's me leaning out the right side), note rust on the side and big surplus aircraft tires, and in the background of the other picture you can see an early jeep station wagon we owned. It was two wheel drive, so not as good in the sand, with a lot of pushing.


----------



## Readie (Nov 29, 2011)

View attachment Internet Explorer Wallpaper.bmp



Here's my much loved Mexico that I described earlier at Werrington Hillclimb in 1988.
spot of 3 wheeling
John


----------



## parsifal (Nov 29, 2011)

Great story Davparlr


----------



## parsifal (Nov 29, 2011)

Njaco said:


> Readie, no problems. Its still fairly civil in here. I'm holding my tongue. If you check the old "Political" section I was very active in it but the Mods made a very, very good decision to remove political talk outside the realm of WWII. So far the thread has been smooth.
> 
> 
> But we are watching!




ah yes, the bloody and violent bearpit threads. I remember them well. The mods certainly made the right call to ban them


----------



## Njaco (Nov 29, 2011)

Love that Dav!!!


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

"... The mods certainly made the right call to ban them..."

From recent comments like that, Parsifal, I think your sniffing around _*to be promoted*_ Moderator ..... 

That wouldn't be a good thing now would it, son - you'd shut us down with historical_ detail _....

MM

Yes, Dave, terrific story.


----------



## parsifal (Nov 29, 2011)

michaelmaltby said:


> "... The mods certainly made the right call to ban them..."
> 
> From recent comments like that, Parsifal, I think your sniffing around _*to be promoted*_ Moderator .....
> 
> ...



No thanks....enough people hate me already, plus i would have to behave too much


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 29, 2011)

Good man. Stay wild. Stay free. 

MM


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 30, 2011)

parsifal said:


> plus i would have to behave too much



All the things I would love to say to certain people, but can't...


----------



## parsifal (Nov 30, 2011)

Yep....the cr*p you guys have to put up with is not my cup of tea. I apologise for my contribution


----------



## Njaco (Nov 30, 2011)

Its just the internet.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 30, 2011)

Njaco said:


> Its just the internet.



Very true as well.


----------



## Readie (Nov 30, 2011)

A moderators life is not an easy one that's for sure.
You guys do a tolerant job of steering the more er, contentious threads away from Michael's 'bear pit'
We all put our foot in it for time to time...the important thing is to realise when you have, sort it out and move on.
John


----------

