Ok. Well even if in five years time nothing has changed, I still won't want to hand over control of our economy to a third party, even if it comes with economic benefits. So frankly we're arguing about pointless shit. You "smh" at the point that our democracy is superior, because you don't have any substance to any refutation. We vote in an accountable government. The fact the UK population fails to hold corrupt governments to account is partly a reflection of the stupidity of the UK people, and partly down to there being no viable alternative. The last Labour government were corrupt as fuck too. So if you're "smh" because British politics is in a sorry state, I guess fair enough. But the system that underpins our democracy is superior, for the simple reason those we vote in actually have control over things like the economy. MEPs from one party have no such control, so there is no accountability. You can't remove a party and change policy. This difference is so fundamental and obvious that your arguments are clearly in bad faith and simply intended to tell me I'm "wrong" to have a preference of the type of democracy we have. I'm not wrong. My opinion is not objective. Neither is yours. If you approve of this form of government, good for you, it's not for me to tell you your opinion is wrong. But don't try to tell me they are similar systems, because they are blatantly not. We don't have a President for a start. They have three. And yes we have a monarchy, which isn't democratic. That's a problem, but at least our monarchy doesn't have any actual power when it comes to running the country. They're a circus, a tourist attraction. They probably become irrelevant when Liz dies.





Reply With Quote