2055
2056

King Felipe of Spain dissolves parliament, clearing way for a rerun of national elections, for the first time since the country’s return to democracy in the late 1970s. (nytimes.com)

green_flash が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]darryldawkins 84ポイント85ポイント  (50子コメント)

As an American, every time I read "so and so dissolves parliament" I briefly think another country has plunged into a dictatorial coup or civil war until I can recall how that silly parliamentary system works.

[–]trygold 93ポイント94ポイント  (18子コメント)

Parliamentary system has its advantages. It does make it easier for smaller parties to get a voice in the government.

[–]Daktush 48ポイント49ポイント  (16子コメント)

Depends on the way seats are scored.

Here in Spain it was made deliberately so small parties have a harder time getting a voice (actually to try to stop situations like the one we are in). Also geographically concentrated groups of voters have a lot more power than the same amount spread accross the country

[–]CommandoDude 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

Better than how it's done over here in America where geographically dispersed groups have a lot more power than the same amount concentrated in big cities.

[–]Daktush 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

In Spain this encourages fighting between region and nationalisms. Particularly bad idea since we are a country where everyone hates each other (most civil wars in history)

[–]Risar 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Its actually a see-saw based on who draws what district lines, which is a complete shit show.

[–]waaaghbosss -2ポイント-1ポイント  (4子コメント)

A lot more? What do you mean? Are you talking about the senate vs congress?

[–]CommandoDude 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

Yes. I resent the fact that states like Wyoming have 54x more say in the senate by having an equal # of senators than my state, California.

[–]Muslerra -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

original thinking was to prevent tyranny by majority

[–]CommandoDude -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

No it wasn't. That role is fulfilled by the president's veto. The senate as is was created to placate the ruling elites of the smaller original colonies.

[–]Muslerra 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-the-electoral-college/

Every state, no matter how small, gets at least 3 electoral votes, to prevent factions forming from more populous states.

[–]fedezen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Spain applies the D'Hondt method.

It is a system designed to make it easier to form a majority in congress, favored by young democracies. In the long run it helps the same old parties keep their seats and prevent new ones from ever gaining any real power in congress.

[–]Valanarch 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

It works better in Spain than it does in most countries. Don't you guys have 4 major parties right now? The U.S. has 2 and France, Canada, and the U.K. all have only 3 (and in the U.K. the SNP barely counts).

[–]Daktush 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

We had 2 for the longest time. People got fed up with them and massive protests occurred, our occupy movement have birth to the far left podemos and ciudadanos rose off the disbanding of a previous center party upyd (Which grew beforehand thanks to this political apathy mainly)

[–]tsunami70 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

As a Scot I'd have to disagree there. SNP has eaten away at the traditional second party (labour) and left the country in a somewhat new position of having no cohesive opposition to the current government.

Labour are in a shambles at the moment so that doesn't seem to be changing anytime soon, and we're left with the Tory party as a huge majority, and lots of smaller parties all shouting about different things.

This is why the Tories are looking to destroy the remaining unions while they can, and possibly exit Europe causing the split up of the UK.

Truly interesting times!

[–][deleted] 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

SNP has eaten away at the traditional second party (labour) and left the country in a somewhat new position of having no cohesive opposition to the current government.

Thanks again for that, lads.

[–]randomisation 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is why the Tories are looking to destroy the remaining unions while they can, and possibly exit Europe causing the split up of the UK

Can you explain how. I've heard this being slung around a lot, but no one so far has given any sound reasoning.

[–]yottskry 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is no sound reasoning, it's just bluster thrown around for people looking for a scapegoat for Labour's problems.

[–]yottskry 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

The SNP are a pain in the arse. Interfering in legislation that affects only England and Wales while simultaneously campaigning for England and Wales not to interfere with Scotland by gaining independence. They're hypocrites happy to mooch of the rest of the UK.

I cannot wait for Scotland to go it alone, particularly when the North Sea oil runs out and they realise they're actually a poor country that's been scrounging off its rich southern neighbours.

[–]dpash 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It also means that it's much easier to get things done. These constitutional crises are a sign of future failure to get things done. With another election, the country gets to say what they want to happen again.

[–]Farlsberg 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

"As an American" "that silly parliamentary system" isn't you one like awful?

[–]Xeios 20ポイント21ポイント  (23子コメント)

As opposed to the oh so wonderful system that might put Trump at its head?

[–]Danuis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The thing about a Republican Democracy is that the more restrictions you place on it, the less democratic or republican it is. If the people want an Authoritarian reactionary, and vote him in by the legal channels, then who has the right to tell them "no"?

Europe has had a slew of reactionary, racist, fascist, or just right wing groups voted in both at the start of the recession in '09 and now again in '14 due to the refugee-migrant influx and I haven't seen any dictatorships form, yet, just the neologism of an 'Xenophobic Democracy' and some right wing measures passed.

It takes a helluva lot more than this to knock over any European state, much less the United States of America. Trump isn't the herald of the end. He may, however, be the herald of the beginning, which to some may be worse. But the US is still relatively stable. No stable nation just flips over. It takes a lot more than economic woes and fearmongering by both political wings to topple a democracy or even just a big state.

A few civil wars, a few famines, a lot more political crises - then we can talk about 'Dictator so-and-so.', ala Spain in the Carlist war era up to Franco, or the continuous struggles, wars, unification, outbursts, and then collapses of the German states and empire; or the fall of the Qing with religious, political, and other such rebellions, foreign invasions and unfair treaties, political and internal unrest, and then warlords and splinter governments. Until that happens in America, I ain't buying the fear mongering, though I am looking at the long term ramifications.

[–]Porphyrogennetos -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes

[–]random_testaccount 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

A means for parliament to force early elections may sound chaotic to Americans, but I'm starting to think it may be better than the gridlock of the past 6 years, with a government that has no majority in congress.

[–]myles_cassidy 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It might seem silly on paper, but is sure does beat a duopoly.

[–]temujin64 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

That's funny, I was thinking about how silly the American system is. Right now the executive has no power over the legislature.

I am aware that the system was designed in that manner so as to avoid a tyrannical executive r but the result has been a system that doesn't work.

If the executive and legislature fundamentally disagree on most issues, how is a country supposed to be run? That's an issue that the US has been struggling with ever since the Democrats lost control of the house and then senate.

At least in parliamentary democracies, except in the case of a hung parliament, the executive always controls the legislature. And given that the countries with the highest standard of living, freest press etc. are all parliamentary democracies, the fear of a tyrannical executive seem unfounded in this day and age. In fact, my country, which is a parliamentary democracy with a hung parliament was still even to get a bipartisan deal on governance within a matter of weeks which for us was outrageously long. In the US it would just never happen.

Also, in spite of the American government's executive branch not controlling the legislature, it has still managed to develop itself a reputation of being a warmongering state.

[–]yottskry 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Agreed. The US model is one of the most ill-conceived systems of democratic government devised. A system where the president can be of the party that doesn't hold power in congress, resulting in a system where no legislation passes and gridlock ensues.

[–]mynameisevan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's not how it usually goes when that happens. Usually the two parties are able to negotiate and stuff. It's just that now one of the parties is dominated by a bunch of immature children who think that negotiating on anything is a bad thing.