Canadian Political Downward Spiral [Split from Reconstitution]

[quadrapiper]

That function is the biggest bar to getting rid of parties. Who sets the agenda? Tables budgets?

Then, say you scrapped all organized parties, and worked out the bureaucratic functional issues. How does anything get done with the hundreds of MP's chasing their own priorities on behalf of their own ridings? Absolute gridlock. No function. To break the gridlock they find common cause with like minded MP's from like minded ridings, loose associations and power blocs form, over time get more formalized and we're back on the road to parties.

Cabinet, confidence of the house, and committees should sort that out. There's likely precedent from the earlier, less organized iterations of Westminster.

 

[daftandbarmy]

how about no one runs for office until they have actively served in the armed forces as was with the Spartans

Of course, because that made them so open to new ideas and 'nimble' right?


"The conservatism of the Spartans was often a strength but also a weakness. The state or society did not change and adapt to new social, political, and military realities. Sparta was unable to change- this meant that it was inflexible, and many even saw it as a petrifying society.[19] The Spartans did not change their military tactics and still used the traditional tactics even when other states in Greece, such as Thebes, were updating the phalanx formation. Then the Spartans could not change even when the citizen body went into a precipitous decline. There was no meaningful effort to reform the agoge system. The society seemed incapable of dealing with many of the problems that it faced in the wake of its victory in the Peloponnesian War."

What Caused the Decline of Sparta - DailyHistory.org

dailyhistory.org

 

[Brad Sallows]

Factionalism will always surface. Nothing prevents reforms to remove all privileges and rights associated with parties, though, so that essentially all candidates and MPs are on the same footing as any independent.

 

[WLSC]

I basically agree with you. I grew up in the U.S. educational system and, yes, I would say that Teddy Roosevelt really changed things. Wilson, Harding, Coolidge (I used to know his grandson) and Hoover were not what I’d call great leaders. Wilson was probably better suited to being the idealistic university chancellor he had been. The other presidents I mentioned were so-so at best. Mind you, I think FDR was, despite some of his missteps, one of the greatest leaders the U.S. ever had or will likely ever have.

I’m in line with you.

 

[mariomike]

As it stands, rural areas have more weight per vote.

Interesting.

 

[YZT580]

Of course, because that made them so open to new ideas and 'nimble' right?


"The conservatism of the Spartans was often a strength but also a weakness. The state or society did not change and adapt to new social, political, and military realities. Sparta was unable to change- this meant that it was inflexible, and many even saw it as a petrifying society.[19] The Spartans did not change their military tactics and still used the traditional tactics even when other states in Greece, such as Thebes, were updating the phalanx formation. Then the Spartans could not change even when the citizen body went into a precipitous decline. There was no meaningful effort to reform the agoge system. The society seemed incapable of dealing with many of the problems that it faced in the wake of its victory in the Peloponnesian War."

What Caused the Decline of Sparta - DailyHistory.org

dailyhistory.org

It won't open their eyes to anything new but it might make a difference if they have put some skin into the game