Have a look at how New Zealand went from First Past The Post to proportional representation twenty years ago. We have had stable governments since with minor parties involved in coalition. The violent swings in policy have lessened and people know that their party vote will determine the shape of parliament.
Ian: I also live in New Zealand and I agree that proportional representation is better than first past the post. But when I lived in Australia it was the preferential system; that's where you vote 1,2,3 etc No 2 is added to 1 and 3 is added to 1. That's the best system.
Stable goverment? Jails have stable goverments. What we want is FREEDOM and you have freedom when you have some power over MP. With PR you give all power to party leaders and you create a party leader oligarchy
The UK is very undemocratic. You get to vote once every 5 years for a candidate you didn't choose, standing for policies you didn't choose and with the first past the post system, if you vote against the majority in your constituency, you vote is ignored completely. On a day to day basis you have no say at all. You go to work and your boss tells you what to do. Your creating the profit your boss enjoys but have no say in what is done with the profits you make.. You can vote for a local councillor but they have no individual power... In our town, a few years ago there was a deeply unpopular traffic warden, everyone complained but it made no difference. This was until he gave a parking ticket top the local duke. Suddenly he disappeared and we had no traffic warden for 3 years. Amazingly, the world didn't grind to a halt and the town got on perfectly well without one.. This is where the power lays...
chris malcomson There is no democracy in the modern world. People use this word without a least knowledge of its definition. The one and the only democratic state was Ancient Greece that established democratic state principles which Romans buried together with the state. If anybody ridiculously says that there’s democracy in the UK, it makes me laugh. The country without a written constitution followed by the precedented law going back to many centuries ago, the strongest and the most politically powerful monarchy in the world, top levelled discrimination of all population including English as well, corrupted police and government doesn’t have the right to shout about their democratic values all over the world unless it wants the circus goes on.
Sorry Chris. If you open your own business, you can do and spend the profit how you choose. The risk lies with you. If it goes tits up, you also lose all your investment. So being the boss is a responsibility. You want a voice, work your way up the ladder or start your own business. As for candidates you didn't choose. Well the onus of picking your political candidate is like picking a winner in a horse race. The horse best suited on the day wins. In the case of voting, it's clear that whomever wins the most seats wins. Thems the rules. If you feel so strongly, go into politics. Again all up to you.
@Albert Pike Albert, the EU is not perfect, far from it...But, the rule of the ignorant mob can never fix that...On the other hand, membership of the EU, with influence can...Regards M8.
@Albert Pike Albert my friend, get a grip...At our age leave it to the young to decide..We've both passed our sell by date...You remind me of another brexiteer, my friend Brian, he's 84 and he and I are still good friends..Take care M8
Priti Patel is enacting a bill later this week in which protests can be such down by police, if they consider the protest “noisy”, “disruptive” or “inconvenient”. That includes one-person protests. This is the death of any shred of British ‘democracy’ that we had left
it's better, but still not good enough. 1 vote every 5 years n we have no input on stuff that goes through parliment inbetween n some things get passed n by time of next election, it's too late n 'x' thing cannot be reversed, such as universal credit which has been causing 120,000 unnecessary deaths each year :(
@@omnishambles4477 It's nearly impossible to vote against Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, Boeing, Pfizer, or AIPAC. That's what it means to live in an oligarchy.
The preferential system used for the Australian House of Representatives (preferential voting - you have to number every candidate in order of your preference ) could be most easily transferred to the Commons. Every electorates member must get at least 50%. A twist on this is the NSW legislative assembly where you don’t have to number every candidate
Mississippi ball but you realise her majesty doesn’t do anything un democratic to us? She has no political power and her rights are ceremonial. Let us Brits decide and not you yanks.
Voting makes a difference when you have power. inUk we still have power over your MP. With PR you will loose all power over politicians and the it won't make any difference what you vote, you will be in a party leader oligarchy
@@dantaylor7344 you will have even less power with PR. You won't even have the power to choose MP. You won't have the power to talk/pressure your MP because you will have no MP.
Fact we are not a 'democracy' has come out since EU issue started. It was always simmering on a back burner but now it's at boiling point. Common sense has never been a 'forte' of politicians as they mostly blow with the wind of the party, power or money.
An Ancient Greek philosopher once said ‘The people who make the best slaves are those who believe they live in a democracy’. We’re given just enough to keep us manageable.
A good video. It points out the big problems with the British system. But I think it is important to mention that Democracy did not just mean "people have the power" it means that people legitimize the power. So as long as the majority is satisfied with their system and it is approved in a secret informed vote the system is democratic. So less direct control but a better informed society can be much more democratic. For this reason countries like Switzerland aren't automatically the most democratic when you ask experts. In most cases Norway and Sweden are ranking at the Top. (Switzerland has a problem with big money and the press)
The power is already illegitimate in Scotland, NI & Wales because England already has more mps than all three combined, hence devolution after it imposed Thatcher on them. It would completely explode if it went to proportional representation and culled SNP etc - even less representation and guaranteed independence, resistance, terrorism
@Norbert Kausen Many experts are criticizing the role of the Swiss media. Especially the Blocher press. Direct democracy is very vulnerable for populism which makes yellow press much more dangerous. In most studies Switzerland is in the top 10 of most democratic nations, but I haven't seen them on first place in any study. (But there is almost no real difference between place 1 and 25) Depending Norway: I was never there so I don't have a real opinion about their satisfaction level. But If you compare ppp Norway (70k) is still wealthier than Switzerland (60k). So the higher prices aren't that much higher. (Germany 50k).
@@shonagraham2752 If I would be Scottish or Irish I would definitely be unsatisfied, too. Malta has more power in the EU than Scotland has inside the UK. I'm not even if I would see the London rule as legitimate if I would be from NI. There is always a danger in giving to much power to the regions (Look at Italy) but in the UK the power of the local governments is a joke. I think Germany and the surrounding countries have a perfect balance. (Except France)
Norbert, how right you are! Add Sweden to the list. High taxes and high prices. It's still a constitutional monarchy just like Norway and UK , but it feels like living in a Socialist Republic and as a Brit living in Sweden you'd feel it instantly. Democracy also means being treated fairly by institutions and having rational/reasonable and practical laws and procedures. Remember the old House of Lords motto, 'hard cases make bad laws'. Out of all European countries, only UK practises it and lives by it. Sweden, Norway, Germany , Belgium, France are ridden by policing procedures, rules and laws that put individual life in a straitjacket as the worst case and exception rather than the rule underscore each procedure, rule and law or government policy. Try and change your name, register a car, apply for/renew your passport , pay your taxes in any of these countries or establish your own company, including in Norway and Sweden and you will take the first flight to UK. It's all relative, isn't it? We should thank our lucky stars we live in UK.
5:15 You forgot to mention that the Alternative Vote method isn't proportional either. Simulations showed it would yield a less proportional House than FPTP! We had a referendum to pick between two bad voting systems.
An important bit of wording in this report was very wrong, re AV. We did NOT vote to 'keep FPTP in place', we voted AGAINST AV, as it was not an acceeptable alternative. It's really important you get that workding right, because advocates for reform constantly get the 'We already had a referendum on this' thrown back in our face... in the face of people who voted against AV. [And that was a direct failure of the Lib Dems.] Please do better.
As far as I can remember it had two options, move to AV or keep our current stystem. It would have been great to have a 3rd option for people who disliked both systems. Then we could have voted for a new system using the first past the post system.
22 years ago, 1 politician lost a safe seat. Wow 😂 We use ranked preference here and it's much more democratic than the UK in my opinion. There's practically no such thing as a safe seat.
Proud Brit and I love the queen ❤️. I’m 13 and in my school most of my mates say they like the monarchy they just don’t care. Not that we want to get rid of it.
1. The UK has not been a REPUBLIC , the UK is democratic you don't have to not have a monarch in order to be democratic you have to not have monarch to be a republic , why do so many people confuse these two? 2 . Cromwell was a dictator and he was definitely not democratic. You wouldn't consider the UK a republic either at the time because it's the same with dictators
@@Konstantinos1648 The UK didn't exist when Cromwell controlled Britain, and it's impossible for it to have existed then, owing to the reason that a king or queen must rule for there to be a kingdom, and without a king, queen, emperor or empress the state is a republic.
@@Konstantinos1648 It was for a short time under Cromwell but even the Great Cromwell understood that the English love Monarchy. A Constitutional Monarchy and a Democracy are incompatible and do not work together. The vote was given to the Common man to appease him and as we have seen in recent times the vote is ignored if it does not suit the Establishment.
How can it be a democracy when England has over 300 MPs Scotland has 59 wales has 20 and Northern Ireland has 10 In an equal hahaha joke equal United Kingdom that’s a tyranny not a democracy
goddess43 throne No rebalancing the system would be a better option. The British system is based on a three branch system between the commons, lords, and the monarchy. Also make it so only the monarchy can opponent lords. The biggest problem with the House of Lords is the commons have inflated the number of lords.
@Norbert Kausen People have endured the same bad things under every type of regime humans tried in history. And you have no idea about my political opinions but what you hastily assumed from my profile picture. All I expressed so far is a healthy dose of skepticism. I guess the mild amusement you give me now is what keeps online trolls so persistent...
In the U.K democracy was murdered as soon as the idea came about.It is the most undemocratic country i have lived in and i come from an ex communist republic.
You clearly didn't spend a lot of time in the ex communist country you come from when it was 'communist'. Britain has its faults but we are not subjected to the dictatorship and tyranny that typified the Soviet Union and Soviet bloc countries. Ask your parents
@@alanfleming4823 You think "we are not subjected to the dictatorship and tyranny that typified the Soviet Union and Soviet bloc countries" and that`s the catch.What about the house of lords what excuse is there for that?Or 1800 electoral law....or sugar tax amongst other thing etc.I do suppose its very democratic of the political class in the U.K to make laws that do not affect them.Did u know that in Glasgow there was an incident where a guy got arrested for starring thru a pharmacy window?Hows that for civil rights huh!
It is sad to say, but without proportional representation we are not democratic. The first past the post system is not democratic.It is is not undemocratic, nor democratic.
If we had a labour government , or if mao's deal had got through channel 4 would show no interest whatsover in the voting system - they never have before .
The Grumpy Englishman May be you don’t need that as you’ve been shafting other home nations for centuries. A small protection for others against the greedy English.
I agree that there should be an English Parliament to deal with the same things for England as Holyrood, Stormont and the Welsh Assembly do for their countries. Unsurprisingly, I have read that the SNP and Plaid Cymru would also be in favour of that.
only two countries in the world have reserved seats in their parliament for ministers of their established religion, the UK and Iran. Only two countries in Europe have a ridiculous unrepresentative electoral first past the post system, the UK and Belarus. At least Belarus doesn't have a feudal monarch. Not sure if it has parliamentary seats for its priests, though.
Total rubbish. I’ve lived in PR systems (Germany Holland Sweden) and those parliaments are never kicked out. The fear of a removal lorry outside number ten if a government gets kicked out means that that government failed to govern the country and has been thus ejected from number ten.
I live in an area where my voting preference is the opposite to the popular choice, so basically my vote is wasted, so I am definitely in favour of P.R. it's the only way to break the stranglehold that the minority percentage of voters have of electing the majority of M.P's
The irish Republic is a good example of how a democracy can be. A democratic Republic with proportional representation. no monarchy as head of law church or army . seperation of church and state no house of lords with hereditary titles. Neutrality and not member of NATO. local governments and national and European healthcare and education standardised including eurasmus etc. A President with cultural diplomatic role not like France. for any possible changes to Constitution by democratic referendums put to population
Bit rich the president of the liberal democrats complaining about vote shares. They seem to be fine about ignoring it when it comes to the EU referendum
You're comparing apples with oranges @ 1:56 ... SNP only field candidates in Scotland, (a COUNTRY with a total population of less than 5 million), they won 35 of 59 seats. What % of SCOTLAND'S seats & votes did they win! FibDems field 650 candidates, won 11 seats with 2.4 million votes UK wide. IF you're going to compare FibDems with the SNP ... How many seats & what % of votes did they win in Scotland! From the way you present this it seems you're implying a 'more democratic' system would see the COUNTRY of Scotland represented by HALF the number of seats in London ... Quickest way to Scottish independence if Westminster go that route 😉
@@willwilisovskywillis5273 They can be banned from dorect campaigning, the candidates are not allowed to be campaign openly [tho a party could obv endorse one]. Then when MP, they are not owned by the party and can vote for what their electorte wants. Party politics was the result of the need to simplify the selection process. But modern technology now makes that process much easier.
One district, one representative, on two round system, representative wins by 51% of votes. Anyone with or without party can compete for the district seat. Then on another election, the people elect president. It's the original USA System, Hamilton coined "representative democracy"
I think you have simplified too much and not understand appreciate the different mechanics also involved. But I agree with abolishing the monarchy, reforming the house of 'Lords' and improving the relationships with representatives.
It is not correct to state that judges of the UK Supreme Court are appointed for life. Under the provisions of the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993, the individual terms of judges are proscribed by a statutory age limit of 70 years of age, unless they were appointed before 31 March 1995, when it is then 75 years of age. The process of appointment is also independent via the respective Judicial Appointments Commission (England and Wales as well as Northern Ireland) and Judicial Appointments Board (Scotland). Recommendations are made to the Prime Minister and approved by The Queen. It is the US Supreme Court where justices are appointed under political influence for life terms but they are able to retire from office.
Oh quit your whining! North Korea,Saudi Arabia,Iran,China Pakistan,Nigeria,Uganda,Russia. There's no credible voting system in any of those countries. If the UK isn't a democracy,then how come the governing party lost in a by election this week in Wales? We had the European elections in May. About 28 million never bothered voting. That was their choice_ in a democracy. Any of this sinking in?
@Albert Pike The EU is a multinational union, it has equal members that elect MEPs, not vassals. That's like saying every country is a vassal of the UN
The word democracy comes from the ancient greeks and literally means what the US has as a slogan "by, of and for the people". As far as I know, there is NO national government on this planet where people make policy. Zero. The Landesgeitmende in switzerland is about the closest where townspeople meet once a year and vote on policy. But thats only local government, not regional and certainly not national. Personally I think there is little point in arguing with somebody who would actually state that the politicians of their country actually represent them. Maybe in scandinavia and parts of europe, but I doubt even there. Of course there are relative variations. If you have NO elections and a tyrant or monarch who simply dictates policy, thats the opposite of democracy and you can recognize changes along that curve where some practices bring you closer to a democracy. I think the problem today is we've stopped moving along that curve. The Magna Carta was a document meant to take power from a tyrant and distribute it to Earls and Barons and those in 'regional' areas who didnt like being told what to do. The evolution should continue further to the public, but certainly in british commonwealth countries that didn't occur and we're still waiting. Nation states are actually a fairly new thing, and right now they are not run democratically. Maybe in the future, but certainly not now.
No its not. It only pretents to be. The top 10% owns 90% of everything. All senators are millionaires and are payed by lobby groups to vote in their interests. Its an oligarchy.
USA has the best political system in the world. Best separation of powers. Two real independent chambers. Legislators and executives elected in different elections. Europe is a joke. PR is high level corruption
Will be good if can also cover UK's two party or multi-party system? In many countries, though they call themselves democratic, but really only have one big dominating party as government and few to none as their shadow
A federal republic with proportional representation and assemblies for each nation as well as both the north and south of england and a fully independant judiciary would just about fix it. Plus the abolition of tax havens and the city of london, and use of internet based polls, petitions and referenda to participate directly in aspects of local government to increase engagement... literally none of this will ever happen though.
@@hfelici Good point, I should clarify that I dont mean direct PR, but rather the transferable vote system where you rank you choices 1234, that way you still get a local MP, while mitigating strategic voting and alowing space for minor parties. As it stands, millions of people would probably vote Green, but choose to vote Labour so as to keep out the Tories or Lib Dems in their area, and we're stuck with a functionally two party system suffocated by partisanship.
@@fearghal10 STV is not PR, depends on the size of the constituencies. STV gives you 4 o 5 MP for a big constituency, each one has 30% or so of votes. Two round system for a small constituency, gives you ONE MP with 51% of votes (USA system). THIS IS YOUR MP, you can call/write/see him. He depends on you. He is more independant of party leader. Politics is about power
@@emm_arr Agreed. And deciding on an extremely complex issue, with many components that will affect many people in many different ways, by a binary referendum creating a simple "majority" and "minority", and a winner-takes-all approach, is totally inappropriate. Then add all the lies and corruption and it becomes an even bigger farce.
@@emm_arr Yes, he might not make anything of it. His comment suggests that he is one of these brexiters who are incapable of looking beyond "we voted, so you deliver", regardless of consequences, corruption and all other aspects. This is an example of why important decisions which will affect people's lives should never be put directly into the hands of the general public. It's like giving a 2-year-old a loaded gun to play with.
we have a republic in America. They have a Monarchy that is the royal family allows to operate as a republic the queen can unilaterally override anything that the house of commons decides or remove a prime minister or declare a war.
but she would be destroyed if she did. If you've watched The Crown (historical drama of her life story, thus based on truth) You may remember some instances when parliament was begging her to get involved. (helped remind me of my modern history at school) she knows thats not her role. She is a guide only n all her education was about the constitution. she didnt get a general education until sometime after she was queen because of that focus. if she was going to, she would have done it post WW2 when we seemed to only have a choice between too old n too ill to run the country. not to mention scandals im not denying she has a stupid amount of power for a symbol. nor do i agree about all the trappings etc. I think we'll find she is the last of the royal royalty as it were. Will, harry n charles are all much more aware of normal reality, of environmental issues etc. As a family, they take their responsibilities very seriously. they know their family history. they know they can n will be killed if they act overtly against the interests of the masses. They r not gunna tip the scales
Democracy is in fact a real idea that actually does work when it is used. But we don't have a democracy at all in the UK. We never have had (not even close to having one). Voting for leaders is absolutely not a democracy, in fact the athenian backlash against elitist elections is what provoked the idea of democracy in the first place. Google Athens and sortition. Sortition is what was meant by democracy. Which is not what we have today. "It is accepted as democratic when public offices are allocated by lot" That is democracy. "and as oligarchic when they are filled by election" and that is what we have today. Oligarchy.
In the UK if Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales all vote one party and England votes another, England automatically wins, the systems rigged no matter what happens, all you can do is hope the English are being their usual selves.
Whats with the incredibly annoying camera angles and motion sickness inducing spinning? Is the content of this video so dull that the viewers need entertained in another manner? Get a grip and do the news like grown ups!
No it is not democratic! It is a Constitutional Monarchy. This means the people hold all the power! Not parliament. MP"s are servants of the people. Not their bosses. A fact that many of them are about to be reminded of in the near future.
Did you not watch the video? The people Do Not hold all the power! A Constitutional Monarchy is a system of Government in which a monarch shares power with a constitutionally organised Government, how the monarch and the constitutionally organised Government is selected will determine how much power the people hold. And I should remind you at this point, that as a recent referendum on the question returned a resounding decision to keep the current system, one could say it is the "will of the people" that it is as it is. The monarch inherits their position, the members of the House of Lords are appointed or inherit their seats and the Commons are elected by a first past the post system that means that only a very few "of the people" hold any real power to effect a change of Government. I would not go on deluding yourself that this is going to change anytime soon old son...after all it is the will of the people that it is this way.
"Is Britain REALLY democratic?" Sorta.. it's not a Democracy though, it is a Constitutional Monarchy. So it's a mix of both a democratic and non-democratic systems. ie: House of Lords vs House of Commons. Not to mention the Monarch has a surprising amount of power still, most people don't know/understand this as the Queen has been pretty lite handed, her father wasn't though, and there is no guarantee that the next King won't be more heavy handed.
Richard Charbonneau The Queen is less of a problem than First Past The Post and the speaker. At the moment, the speaker’s seat (currently Buckinghamshire I think...) is incontestable while John Bercow holds the chair. People there do not get to vote in general elections! Bercow also gets to select which amendments are even discussed and voted on! He can actually manipulate policies by choosing which policy amendments are worthwhile, and could have seriously impacted some Brexit outcomes for example. I don’t think the monarchy makes enough of a difference to the status of the UK as democratic for it to be the main focus here.
@@tacosmexicanstyle7846 that is only because she doesn't exercise her powers. The Queen hold an unbelievable amount of power, she has final say on any laws passed, she has final say who is the Prime Minster, she can devolve Parliament and force a new general election, she is the only person that can declare war, or sue for peace, she has absolute power over treaties (yes she could literally come out tomorrow and say, no I don't like this Brexit business, I wish to remain in the EU, and that would be the end of it) she is the head of the Military (why its Her Majesty's Soldiers). th-cam.com/video/wiDCwqpupj8/w-d-xo.html here is a great video on the actual powers of the Queen.
Richard Charbonneau If you think her ‘powers’ are actually exercisable then that means you don’t know anything about British constitutional history. Most of the royal prerogative (including declaring war) is now done by the PM without the Queen’s permission, or by the PM on her behalf. The last time a bill was blocked by the monarch was in Queen Anne’s reign. The monarchy does not have supremacy over parliament and hasn’t done for hundreds of years.
A coalition WAS NOT formed in 2017. The Conservatives & DUP entered a confidence and supply agreement where DUP will support the government in key votes. Thus not sitting on the government benches or holding ministerial positions.... that’s is not what a coalition is.. as this video says
This is why you can tell people think parliament is a joke and we aren't democratic. We have parties like the monster party. We may have a say for the house of Commons but we don't have a say for the house of lords or who is queen. Therefore we aren't democratic. The house of lords and the queen are part of the parliament and so have a say. We only vote for a third of a parliament in essence. Which when you put it like that 2/3rd of the parliament which we don't vote for has a bigger say. It should just be one person and that's it but it doesn't work like that in Britain.
Proportionate representation resullts in the minority ruling it over the majroity. I should know, in New Zealand we have a "Mixed Member Proportional" (MMP) system. Minority/fringe parties are the only ones who like MMP and in many cases they are the ones who get to decide who the government will be.
2 advantages of the additional member system over STV. 1. It maintains a clear link between you and your MP. 2. It isn't a preferential system, so if we have a referendum it cannot be legitimately claimed that we have already had a referendum on the matter. It does have 2 potential disadvantages though. 1. It could be less proportional, especially in places like Scotland. 2. It relies on party lists, making it hard to get rid of a disliked politician in a party that has some broad support.
Britain is a partial democracy. Creating a fully democratic system would be simple if the largest parties that benefit from the current system cared to change it, which will likely be never. 1 - Switch to a mixed member proportional voting system 2 - Either abolish the House of Lords or reform it into a fully elected body 3 - Abolish the monarchy 4 - Create a written constitution
Not one party reflects my views. Less than 30% of us bother to vote. I assume this is for that very reason. Brexit has shown us to be clearly undemocratic. The actions of all three main parties reguarding brexit has been utterly shameful.
It was criminal how ill-informed the country was about PR in the 2011 referendum. I couldn't make head nor tail of the leaflet and I'm not dumb. I reckon people just stuck with what they knew
The uk is under one system of government. That is to say no fundamental difference or opinions on how the country should be governed is prompted or introduced to the people. Examples include no islamic teaching or benefits are introduced to the people at young age this is fundamental difference anything so different as this example is never introduced another example no Republicanism is actively promoted or given airtime. This is not because people are not interested in such fundamentally different ideas but it is actively censored or actively distorted in order to silence it.
Brits do not care if they live in democracy, as long as the Queen is around. It is the same as North Korea. The difference on the surface comes from the history; Brits keep on expanding their presence using resources in the US, in which they have gotten retreats, but no defeat, while North Korea was defeated in Korean War, and live in denial since then.
That was "Alternative Vote" and it was a waste of time to even put it to the people to vote on as it was a dogs breakfast of a system that nobody really wanted. It was even less proportional than first past the post.
The British electoral system is undemocratic and unrepresentative, the first past the post system hails from an era long past when ordinary people first acquired a vote.....it needs badly to evolve. Democracy is about representation not competition, elections are not about winning or losing, minority groups need representation as much as the majority. In Britain significant minorities are at the very least under represented in Parliament, if Britain adopted a fairer P.R. system the crippled political landscape and current democratic stagnation evident in the U.K. would disappear. Coalition Governments representing both minority and majority groups are the norm in mature democracies across Europe, they are largely successful, indeed it is usually impossible for a single party to secure an overall majority in such parliaments. Lack of representation has led to the voices of minority groups not been heard and ignored by British Governments over many decades, this has bred frustration and apathy and helped bring Britain to it's present situation. Democracy needs to mature in Britain. I am an avid and neutral follower of UK politics from another European country.
Where there's complete licence to effectively lie Your way into power with dishonest pledges completely free of accountability what does that tell You?
I think the title of this video is a little incomplete. The first past the post system is flawed, I agree. Funnily enough I thought it had changed, so I am obviously not too up to date!
I assume this was recent footage. The test of our democracy is surely whether the establishment honours the result of the EU referendum. Considering all these other elections is rather irrelevant at the moment.
When these UK or any of the european nations speak about dmemocracy, I just remember my Indian ancestors whom these brits, portuguese or french killed in order to suppress the freedom movement and irony is today they are being vocal about every nation being a democratic nation and a seccular nation where in still most countries still didnt attain freedom till date and are under british rule if you google it. Jallianwalah bagh is one such incident out of many which happened pre independence in India and brits massacred many Indians sadly and it is in our history
Have a look at how New Zealand went from First Past The Post to proportional representation twenty years ago. We have had stable governments since with minor parties involved in coalition. The violent swings in policy have lessened and people know that their party vote will determine the shape of parliament.
You guys also ban people from speaking in your country so you know.
Win some lose some.
@@sambland3903 People have to use sign language and txt because it's illegal to speak in New Zealand. Yeah. Sure. What a load of shut.
Ian: I also live in New Zealand and I agree that proportional representation is better than first past the post. But when I lived in Australia it was the preferential system; that's where you vote 1,2,3 etc No 2 is added to 1 and 3 is added to 1. That's the best system.
Stable goverment? Jails have stable goverments. What we want is FREEDOM and you have freedom when you have some power over MP. With PR you give all power to party leaders and you create a party leader oligarchy
@@hfelici "and you have freedom when you have some power over MP" Do you? How so?
The UK is very undemocratic. You get to vote once every 5 years for a candidate you didn't choose, standing for policies you didn't choose and with the first past the post system, if you vote against the majority in your constituency, you vote is ignored completely.
On a day to day basis you have no say at all. You go to work and your boss tells you what to do. Your creating the profit your boss enjoys but have no say in what is done with the profits you make..
You can vote for a local councillor but they have no individual power... In our town, a few years ago there was a deeply unpopular traffic warden, everyone complained but it made no difference. This was until he gave a parking ticket top the local duke. Suddenly he disappeared and we had no traffic warden for 3 years. Amazingly, the world didn't grind to a halt and the town got on perfectly well without one.. This is where the power lays...
chris malcomson There is no democracy in the modern world. People use this word without a least knowledge of its definition. The one and the only democratic state was Ancient Greece that established democratic state principles which Romans buried together with the state. If anybody ridiculously says that there’s democracy in the UK, it makes me laugh. The country without a written constitution followed by the precedented law going back to many centuries ago, the strongest and the most politically powerful monarchy in the world, top levelled discrimination of all population including English as well, corrupted police and government doesn’t have the right to shout about their democratic values all over the world unless it wants the circus goes on.
Albert Pike Clean your brains from pasta.
Sorry Chris. If you open your own business, you can do and spend the profit how you choose. The risk lies with you. If it goes tits up, you also lose all your investment. So being the boss is a responsibility. You want a voice, work your way up the ladder or start your own business. As for candidates you didn't choose. Well the onus of picking your political candidate is like picking a winner in a horse race. The horse best suited on the day wins. In the case of voting, it's clear that whomever wins the most seats wins. Thems the rules. If you feel so strongly, go into politics. Again all up to you.
@Albert Pike Albert, the EU is not perfect, far from it...But, the rule of the ignorant mob can never fix that...On the other hand, membership of the EU, with influence can...Regards M8.
@Albert Pike Albert my friend, get a grip...At our age leave it to the young to decide..We've both passed our sell by date...You remind me of another brexiteer, my friend Brian, he's 84 and he and I are still good friends..Take care M8
I had no idea there was a referendum on "First past the post". Anyone else?
no but I'm fuming that it lost that well sad
Was just below voting age at that time 😢. And had no idea it was happening anyway
"Isn't the problem that PR leads to unstable goverments " - As if we had worthy governments with the present system..
legit. and tbh the tory and labour parties are both divided anyway so may as well have coalitions
Priti Patel is enacting a bill later this week in which protests can be such down by police, if they consider the protest “noisy”, “disruptive” or “inconvenient”. That includes one-person protests. This is the death of any shred of British ‘democracy’ that we had left
As an American we don’t even have a democracy we have an oligarchy... You brits actually have a decent system! Love from 🇺🇸 I’d love to move there!
it's better, but still not good enough. 1 vote every 5 years n we have no input on stuff that goes through parliment inbetween n some things get passed n by time of next election, it's too late n 'x' thing cannot be reversed, such as universal credit which has been causing 120,000 unnecessary deaths each year :(
A decent system? You got jokes!
How is the US an oligarchy? It's clearly a representative democracy
@@omnishambles4477 It's nearly impossible to vote against Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, Boeing, Pfizer, or AIPAC. That's what it means to live in an oligarchy.
@@voteforno.6155 That's a problem with lobbying money and party funding, not the system itself
The preferential system used for the Australian House of Representatives (preferential voting - you have to number every candidate in order of your preference ) could be most easily transferred to the Commons. Every electorates member must get at least 50%. A twist on this is the NSW legislative assembly where you don’t have to number every candidate
All MPs love us. It doesn't matter who you vote for. They have all our interests at heart. xx
🤣
Are you being sarcastic
What planet do you live on ffs
Of course not......@@RayFog1
Dont make me laugh🤣😃👏👏👏🇬🇧🏴🏴🏴
This is why it pisses me when I hear Brits claim at least they are a democracy !
It's even more of a laughing matter when living in Scotland, especially with Brexit.
The Uk is the 12th best democracy in front of USA and France.
@@joycerouget2379 yea that's a lie because they still have Kings and Queens
Mississippi ball but you realise her majesty doesn’t do anything un democratic to us? She has no political power and her rights are ceremonial. Let us Brits decide and not you yanks.
@@alexilsley897 true keep your lovely queen
"If voting made any difference it would be illegal" George Carlin
Voting makes a difference when you have power. inUk we still have power over your MP. With PR you will loose all power over politicians and the it won't make any difference what you vote, you will be in a party leader oligarchy
@@hfelici In the UK we have NO power. Grow up and realise this please
@@dantaylor7344 you will have even less power with PR. You won't even have the power to choose MP. You won't have the power to talk/pressure your MP because you will have no MP.
@@dantaylor7344 JEREMY CORBONTHE COB MATTEE
@@PostScarcitytCat Boris wazockywoo mattee
Fact we are not a 'democracy' has come out since EU issue started. It was always simmering on a back burner but now it's at boiling point. Common sense has never been a 'forte' of politicians as they mostly blow with the wind of the party, power or money.
An Ancient Greek philosopher once said ‘The people who make the best slaves are those who believe they live in a democracy’. We’re given just enough to keep us manageable.
this is really informative but oh god the constant movement of the camera is driving me insane
I get dizzy just watching this. Like my eyes just constantly lose focus.
A good video. It points out the big problems with the British system.
But I think it is important to mention that Democracy did not just mean "people have the power" it means that people legitimize the power. So as long as the majority is satisfied with their system and it is approved in a secret informed vote the system is democratic. So less direct control but a better informed society can be much more democratic.
For this reason countries like Switzerland aren't automatically the most democratic when you ask experts. In most cases Norway and Sweden are ranking at the Top. (Switzerland has a problem with big money and the press)
The power is already illegitimate in Scotland, NI & Wales because England already has more mps than all three combined, hence devolution after it imposed Thatcher on them. It would completely explode if it went to proportional representation and culled SNP etc - even less representation and guaranteed independence, resistance, terrorism
@Norbert Kausen Many experts are criticizing the role of the Swiss media. Especially the Blocher press. Direct democracy is very vulnerable for populism which makes yellow press much more dangerous. In most studies Switzerland is in the top 10 of most democratic nations, but I haven't seen them on first place in any study. (But there is almost no real difference between place 1 and 25)
Depending Norway: I was never there so I don't have a real opinion about their satisfaction level. But If you compare ppp Norway (70k) is still wealthier than Switzerland (60k). So the higher prices aren't that much higher. (Germany 50k).
@@shonagraham2752 If I would be Scottish or Irish I would definitely be unsatisfied, too. Malta has more power in the EU than Scotland has inside the UK.
I'm not even if I would see the London rule as legitimate if I would be from NI.
There is always a danger in giving to much power to the regions (Look at Italy) but in the UK the power of the local governments is a joke.
I think Germany and the surrounding countries have a perfect balance. (Except France)
Norbert, how right you are! Add Sweden to the list. High taxes and high prices. It's still a constitutional monarchy just like Norway and UK , but it feels like living in a Socialist Republic and as a Brit living in Sweden you'd feel it instantly. Democracy also means being treated fairly by institutions and having rational/reasonable and practical laws and procedures. Remember the old House of Lords motto, 'hard cases make bad laws'. Out of all European countries, only UK practises it and lives by it. Sweden, Norway, Germany , Belgium, France are ridden by policing procedures, rules and laws that put individual life in a straitjacket as the worst case and exception rather than the rule underscore each procedure, rule and law or government policy. Try and change your name, register a car, apply for/renew your passport , pay your taxes in any of these countries or establish your own company, including in Norway and Sweden and you will take the first flight to UK. It's all relative, isn't it? We should thank our lucky stars we live in UK.
They're not regions they're countries as well as Celtic nations along with Cornwall and Isle of Man.
5:15 You forgot to mention that the Alternative Vote method isn't proportional either. Simulations showed it would yield a less proportional House than FPTP! We had a referendum to pick between two bad voting systems.
It doesnt matter in a democracy the government is accountable to the people . Not in the Uk the government is accountable to the queen
An important bit of wording in this report was very wrong, re AV. We did NOT vote to 'keep FPTP in place', we voted AGAINST AV, as it was not an acceeptable alternative. It's really important you get that workding right, because advocates for reform constantly get the 'We already had a referendum on this' thrown back in our face... in the face of people who voted against AV. [And that was a direct failure of the Lib Dems.] Please do better.
As far as I can remember it had two options, move to AV or keep our current stystem. It would have been great to have a 3rd option for people who disliked both systems. Then we could have voted for a new system using the first past the post system.
@@Competitive_Antagonist If we could do three way questions on referendums, then the 2nd Brexit vote would be a dodle.
22 years ago, 1 politician lost a safe seat. Wow 😂 We use ranked preference here and it's much more democratic than the UK in my opinion. There's practically no such thing as a safe seat.
Democracy will win and we will get out. Come on Boris get it done.
did you even watch the video?
Britain always seemed like a police state to me, so my answer to is Britain really democratic is no!
@Albert Pike Very stupid shitpost, Al!
Proud Brit and I love the queen ❤️. I’m 13 and in my school most of my mates say they like the monarchy they just don’t care. Not that we want to get rid of it.
yeah our queen also invaded india and made them poor, still proud
@@varun2440 She didn't, India was already poor, but ok
If you slander the queen you can be executed
@@anti-animepolice7881 India was one of the richest countries in the world before the Brits and the French showed up.
You'll grow up
We have 59 seats here in Scotland, England has over 500. What's the point voting when we never agree on anything and get things their way...
We have never been a democracy we are a Constitutional Monarchy and with the exception under Cromwell, we always have been.
1. The UK has not been a REPUBLIC , the UK is democratic you don't have to not have a monarch in order to be democratic you have to not have monarch to be a republic , why do so many people confuse these two?
2 . Cromwell was a dictator and he was definitely not democratic. You wouldn't consider the UK a republic either at the time because it's the same with dictators
@@Konstantinos1648 The UK didn't exist when Cromwell controlled Britain, and it's impossible for it to have existed then, owing to the reason that a king or queen must rule for there to be a kingdom, and without a king, queen, emperor or empress the state is a republic.
@@Konstantinos1648 It was for a short time under Cromwell but even the Great Cromwell understood that the English love Monarchy. A Constitutional Monarchy and a Democracy are incompatible and do not work together. The vote was given to the Common man to appease him and as we have seen in recent times the vote is ignored if it does not suit the Establishment.
@@bilbobaggins5938 except if it's a dictatorship
@@Konstantinos1648 Dictatorships are not an exception, they're a form of republic.
How can it be a democracy when England has over 300 MPs Scotland has 59 wales has 20 and Northern Ireland has 10
In an equal hahaha joke equal United Kingdom that’s a tyranny not a democracy
Because england has the most people. Duh.
Get rid of the house of lords and the monarchy.
goddess43 throne No rebalancing the system would be a better option. The British system is based on a three branch system between the commons, lords, and the monarchy. Also make it so only the monarchy can opponent lords. The biggest problem with the House of Lords is the commons have inflated the number of lords.
Acid Base Reaction I agree. Let her majesty stay.
I agree completely. Get rid of them both.
No way fair. The poor green party has upto 10% support of the public, but that translates to only a couple of seats.
Only one seat, actually.
6:46 - nice dart board
Shut up
You seem to assume more democracy is good. What about fact checking that?
@Norbert Kausen You seem to assume self-determination is good. According to what metric?
@Norbert Kausen People have endured the same bad things under every type of regime humans tried in history.
And you have no idea about my political opinions but what you hastily assumed from my profile picture. All I expressed so far is a healthy dose of skepticism. I guess the mild amusement you give me now is what keeps online trolls so persistent...
Democracy is inherently inefficient, but it's worth it to preserve freedom of speech, thought and not live under an oppressive regime.
We believe in democracy just as long as you vote remain.
Hahaha. You nailed it! The voters that dont accept the results are the same ones saying democracy is under attack.
This video is about lack of proportional representation, not Brexit. Way to miss the point - or derail it deliberately.
IN FACT, UKIP was mentioned as an example of the political parties that suffer the most from this undemocratic system.
No of course it isnt. The top 10% owns 90% of everything. Its an oligarchy.
the only thing that is democratic in brittain is the bad weather.Everybody gets that.
Britain will achieve democracy ony if one family rule dynasty is abolished.
In the U.K democracy was murdered as soon as the idea came about.It is the most undemocratic country i have lived in and i come from an ex communist republic.
You clearly didn't spend a lot of time in the ex communist country you come from when it was 'communist'. Britain has its faults but we are not subjected to the dictatorship and tyranny that typified the Soviet Union and Soviet bloc countries. Ask your parents
@@alanfleming4823 You think "we are not subjected to the dictatorship and tyranny that typified the Soviet Union and Soviet bloc countries" and that`s the catch.What about the house of lords what excuse is there for that?Or 1800 electoral law....or sugar tax amongst other thing etc.I do suppose its very democratic of the political class in the U.K to make laws that do not affect them.Did u know that in Glasgow there was an incident where a guy got arrested for starring thru a pharmacy window?Hows that for civil rights huh!
It is sad to say, but without proportional representation we are not democratic. The first past the post system is not democratic.It is is not undemocratic, nor democratic.
If we had a labour government , or if mao's deal had got through channel 4 would show no interest whatsover in the voting system - they never have before .
Have no democracy in uk,
Also devolution shafted the English... Where's our parliament putting English issues first? We have to put the whole of the UK first
The Grumpy Englishman May be you don’t need that as you’ve been shafting other home nations for centuries. A small protection for others against the greedy English.
I agree that there should be an English Parliament to deal with the same things for England as Holyrood, Stormont and the Welsh Assembly do for their countries. Unsurprisingly, I have read that the SNP and Plaid Cymru would also be in favour of that.
LET'S NOT KID OURSELVES, WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY, WE LIVE IN A PLUTOCRACY, EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE!
only two countries in the world have reserved seats in their parliament for ministers of their established religion, the UK and Iran.
Only two countries in Europe have a ridiculous unrepresentative electoral first past the post system, the UK and Belarus. At least Belarus doesn't have a feudal monarch. Not sure if it has parliamentary seats for its priests, though.
Total rubbish. I’ve lived in PR systems (Germany Holland Sweden) and those parliaments are never kicked out. The fear of a removal lorry outside number ten if a government gets kicked out means that that government failed to govern the country and has been thus ejected from number ten.
PR = oligarchy of the party leaders. PR is total corruption because there is no control.
We in Spain know well
Scotland deseves to be independent! Free the Scots!
@Albert Pike You're not Scottish either, Al! You're more of a Nedski. Al luvz Putinanni.
I live in an area where my voting preference is the opposite to the popular choice, so basically my vote is wasted, so I am definitely in favour of P.R. it's the only way to break the stranglehold that the minority percentage of voters have of electing the majority of M.P's
The irish Republic is a good example of how a democracy can be. A democratic Republic with proportional representation. no monarchy as head of law church or army . seperation of church and state no house of lords with hereditary titles. Neutrality and not member of NATO. local governments and national and European healthcare and education standardised including eurasmus etc. A President with cultural diplomatic role not like France. for any possible changes to Constitution by democratic referendums put to population
Bit rich the president of the liberal democrats complaining about vote shares. They seem to be fine about ignoring it when it comes to the EU referendum
Good shitpost! People "ignore" democracy by not supporting a vote. Sure. Are you stupid?
Only concerned with the share of the vote when it suits her.
@@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304 "Only concerned with the share of the vote when it suits her." But it wouldn't all the time! Good shitpost!
@@emm_arr You sound like you might be.
@@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304 That's nice for you! Are you sure you're not?
You're comparing apples with oranges @ 1:56 ...
SNP only field candidates in Scotland, (a COUNTRY with a total population of less than 5 million), they won 35 of 59 seats.
What % of SCOTLAND'S seats & votes did they win!
FibDems field 650 candidates, won 11 seats with 2.4 million votes UK wide.
IF you're going to compare FibDems with the SNP ... How many seats & what % of votes did they win in Scotland!
From the way you present this it seems you're implying a 'more democratic' system would see the COUNTRY of Scotland represented by HALF the number of seats in London ... Quickest way to Scottish independence if Westminster go that route 😉
How is there a risk of giving us independence, shows that English colonialism racist mindset from c4
The answer is to remove party politics from the electoral process.
How?
@@willwilisovskywillis5273 They can be banned from dorect campaigning, the candidates are not allowed to be campaign openly [tho a party could obv endorse one].
Then when MP, they are not owned by the party and can vote for what their electorte wants.
Party politics was the result of the need to simplify the selection process. But modern technology now makes that process much easier.
One district, one representative, on two round system, representative wins by 51% of votes. Anyone with or without party can compete for the district seat. Then on another election, the people elect president. It's the original USA System, Hamilton coined "representative democracy"
Of course not. We also need democracy in the workplace, but that idea is too extreme for Channel 4.
Since this posted, is there a large enough crisis for the public to support a new political system change? Who will be the architect of a new system?
Abolish the monarchy, abolish the house of lords, and replace with directly elected representatives.
Oh, and change first past the post to a proportional system. Sorted.
I think you have simplified too much and not understand appreciate the different mechanics also involved. But I agree with abolishing the monarchy, reforming the house of 'Lords' and improving the relationships with representatives.
No.
@@DanDman14a But why not?
Its not a democracy its an oligarchy
Britain needs a system of proportional representation, but it also needs to become a modern democratic republic with a formal written constitution.
🤡🤡🤡🤡
Your thumbnail description is misleading. You ask one question but go on to talk about our electoral system.
Democracy is not just about politics.
It is not correct to state that judges of the UK Supreme Court are appointed for life. Under the provisions of the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993, the individual terms of judges are proscribed by a statutory age limit of 70 years of age, unless they were appointed before 31 March 1995, when it is then 75 years of age. The process of appointment is also independent via the respective Judicial Appointments Commission (England and Wales as well as Northern Ireland) and Judicial Appointments Board (Scotland). Recommendations are made to the Prime Minister and approved by The Queen. It is the US Supreme Court where justices are appointed under political influence for life terms but they are able to retire from office.
Oh quit your whining! North Korea,Saudi Arabia,Iran,China Pakistan,Nigeria,Uganda,Russia. There's no credible voting system in any of those countries. If the UK isn't a democracy,then how come the governing party lost in a by election this week in Wales? We had the European elections in May. About 28 million never bothered voting. That was their choice_ in a democracy. Any of this sinking in?
*The German political system is MUCH better and MUCH more democratic!*
@Albert Pike The EU is a multinational union, it has equal members that elect MEPs, not vassals. That's like saying every country is a vassal of the UN
The word democracy comes from the ancient greeks and literally means what the US has as a slogan "by, of and for the people". As far as I know, there is NO national government on this planet where people make policy. Zero. The Landesgeitmende in switzerland is about the closest where townspeople meet once a year and vote on policy. But thats only local government, not regional and certainly not national.
Personally I think there is little point in arguing with somebody who would actually state that the politicians of their country actually represent them. Maybe in scandinavia and parts of europe, but I doubt even there.
Of course there are relative variations. If you have NO elections and a tyrant or monarch who simply dictates policy, thats the opposite of democracy and you can recognize changes along that curve where some practices bring you closer to a democracy. I think the problem today is we've stopped moving along that curve. The Magna Carta was a document meant to take power from a tyrant and distribute it to Earls and Barons and those in 'regional' areas who didnt like being told what to do. The evolution should continue further to the public, but certainly in british commonwealth countries that didn't occur and we're still waiting. Nation states are actually a fairly new thing, and right now they are not run democratically. Maybe in the future, but certainly not now.
Well duh, the United States for example is a representative Democracy.
nah, it's rather corporational democracy, where only money matters
It's pseudo Democracy decided by who has the most funding by the money men who pull the strings, bit like most Western "Democracies"
true, but the US have full legal fundraising, which is obvious prove, that there "money makes the world go round".
No its not. It only pretents to be. The top 10% owns 90% of everything. All senators are millionaires and are payed by lobby groups to vote in their interests. Its an oligarchy.
USA has the best political system in the world. Best separation of powers. Two real independent chambers. Legislators and executives elected in different elections. Europe is a joke. PR is high level corruption
NOPE, waste of 13 minutes, we all know it it isn't so why do we waste air time lying?
Anyone who thinks they live in a parliamentary Democracy in the UK is severely deluded.
Will be good if can also cover UK's two party or multi-party system? In many countries, though they call themselves democratic, but really only have one big dominating party as government and few to none as their shadow
A federal republic with proportional representation and assemblies for each nation as well as both the north and south of england and a fully independant judiciary would just about fix it. Plus the abolition of tax havens and the city of london, and use of internet based polls, petitions and referenda to participate directly in aspects of local government to increase engagement... literally none of this will ever happen though.
@@hfelici Good point, I should clarify that I dont mean direct PR, but rather the transferable vote system where you rank you choices 1234, that way you still get a local MP, while mitigating strategic voting and alowing space for minor parties. As it stands, millions of people would probably vote Green, but choose to vote Labour so as to keep out the Tories or Lib Dems in their area, and we're stuck with a functionally two party system suffocated by partisanship.
@@fearghal10 STV is not PR, depends on the size of the constituencies. STV gives you 4 o 5 MP for a big constituency, each one has 30% or so of votes. Two round system for a small constituency, gives you ONE MP with 51% of votes (USA system). THIS IS YOUR MP, you can call/write/see him. He depends on you. He is more independant of party leader. Politics is about power
whats with the shaky graphics at the back
And if a majority votes for something in a referendum, does the government actually carry it out?
It shouldn't if it's not realistic. It should never be offered. People might tell lies to affect the opinions of others.
@@emm_arr Agreed. And deciding on an extremely complex issue, with many components that will affect many people in many different ways, by a binary referendum creating a simple "majority" and "minority", and a winner-takes-all approach, is totally inappropriate. Then add all the lies and corruption and it becomes an even bigger farce.
@@erikzoe1 Good point. I wonder what Tom Maj makes of all of that ... He's told lies in an attempt to sway opinions to make Brexit happen.
@@emm_arr Yes, he might not make anything of it. His comment suggests that he is one of these brexiters who are incapable of looking beyond "we voted, so you deliver", regardless of consequences, corruption and all other aspects. This is an example of why important decisions which will affect people's lives should never be put directly into the hands of the general public. It's like giving a 2-year-old a loaded gun to play with.
we have a republic in America. They have a Monarchy that is the royal family allows to operate as a republic the queen can unilaterally override anything that the house of commons decides or remove a prime minister or declare a war.
Name one time the monarch has done this in the last 100 years
but she would be destroyed if she did. If you've watched The Crown (historical drama of her life story, thus based on truth) You may remember some instances when parliament was begging her to get involved. (helped remind me of my modern history at school) she knows thats not her role. She is a guide only n all her education was about the constitution. she didnt get a general education until sometime after she was queen because of that focus.
if she was going to, she would have done it post WW2 when we seemed to only have a choice between too old n too ill to run the country. not to mention scandals
im not denying she has a stupid amount of power for a symbol. nor do i agree about all the trappings etc. I think we'll find she is the last of the royal royalty as it were.
Will, harry n charles are all much more aware of normal reality, of environmental issues etc. As a family, they take their responsibilities very seriously. they know their family history. they know they can n will be killed if they act overtly against the interests of the masses. They r not gunna tip the scales
Who is here from online lessons?
Democracy is in fact a real idea that actually does work when it is used. But we don't have a democracy at all in the UK. We never have had (not even close to having one). Voting for leaders is absolutely not a democracy, in fact the athenian backlash against elitist elections is what provoked the idea of democracy in the first place. Google Athens and sortition. Sortition is what was meant by democracy. Which is not what we have today.
"It is accepted as democratic when public offices are allocated by lot" That is democracy.
"and as oligarchic when they are filled by election" and that is what we have today. Oligarchy.
If democracy is socialism, so today is very democratic.
I wish there was a Kernowek (Cornis) National Assembly. M’ath Kernow, Kernow bys vyken!
In the UK if Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales all vote one party and England votes another, England automatically wins, the systems rigged no matter what happens, all you can do is hope the English are being their usual selves.
Whats with the incredibly annoying camera angles and motion sickness inducing spinning? Is the content of this video so dull that the viewers need entertained in another manner? Get a grip and do the news like grown ups!
No it is not democratic! It is a Constitutional Monarchy. This means the people hold all the power! Not parliament. MP"s are servants of the people. Not their bosses. A fact that many of them are about to be reminded of in the near future.
Did you not watch the video? The people Do Not hold all the power! A Constitutional Monarchy is a system of Government in which a monarch shares power with a constitutionally organised Government, how the monarch and the constitutionally organised Government is selected will determine how much power the people hold. And I should remind you at this point, that as a recent referendum on the question returned a resounding decision to keep the current system, one could say it is the "will of the people" that it is as it is. The monarch inherits their position, the members of the House of Lords are appointed or inherit their seats and the Commons are elected by a first past the post system that means that only a very few "of the people" hold any real power to effect a change of Government. I would not go on deluding yourself that this is going to change anytime soon old son...after all it is the will of the people that it is this way.
Please show me the constitution.
"Is Britain REALLY democratic?" Sorta.. it's not a Democracy though, it is a Constitutional Monarchy. So it's a mix of both a democratic and non-democratic systems. ie: House of Lords vs House of Commons. Not to mention the Monarch has a surprising amount of power still, most people don't know/understand this as the Queen has been pretty lite handed, her father wasn't though, and there is no guarantee that the next King won't be more heavy handed.
Britain must become a Republic...hhhhahahah...
Richard Charbonneau
The Queen is less of a problem than First Past The Post and the speaker.
At the moment, the speaker’s seat (currently Buckinghamshire I think...) is incontestable while John Bercow holds the chair. People there do not get to vote in general elections!
Bercow also gets to select which amendments are even discussed and voted on! He can actually manipulate policies by choosing which policy amendments are worthwhile, and could have seriously impacted some Brexit outcomes for example.
I don’t think the monarchy makes enough of a difference to the status of the UK as democratic for it to be the main focus here.
@@tacosmexicanstyle7846 that is only because she doesn't exercise her powers. The Queen hold an unbelievable amount of power, she has final say on any laws passed, she has final say who is the Prime Minster, she can devolve Parliament and force a new general election, she is the only person that can declare war, or sue for peace, she has absolute power over treaties (yes she could literally come out tomorrow and say, no I don't like this Brexit business, I wish to remain in the EU, and that would be the end of it) she is the head of the Military (why its Her Majesty's Soldiers). th-cam.com/video/wiDCwqpupj8/w-d-xo.html here is a great video on the actual powers of the Queen.
Richard Charbonneau
If you think her ‘powers’ are actually exercisable then that means you don’t know anything about British constitutional history. Most of the royal prerogative (including declaring war) is now done by the PM without the Queen’s permission, or by the PM on her behalf. The last time a bill was blocked by the monarch was in Queen Anne’s reign. The monarchy does not have supremacy over parliament and hasn’t done for hundreds of years.
The problem is, Britain doesn't have a constitution. So tough luck mate, UK is a monarchy.
A coalition WAS NOT formed in 2017. The Conservatives & DUP entered a confidence and supply agreement where DUP will support the government in key votes. Thus not sitting on the government benches or holding ministerial positions.... that’s is not what a coalition is.. as this video says
This is why you can tell people think parliament is a joke and we aren't democratic. We have parties like the monster party. We may have a say for the house of Commons but we don't have a say for the house of lords or who is queen. Therefore we aren't democratic. The house of lords and the queen are part of the parliament and so have a say. We only vote for a third of a parliament in essence. Which when you put it like that 2/3rd of the parliament which we don't vote for has a bigger say. It should just be one person and that's it but it doesn't work like that in Britain.
It’s simple, I should be able to vote for any party I want to vote for not just four terrible parties.
Proportionate representation resullts in the minority ruling it over the majroity. I should know, in New Zealand we have a "Mixed Member Proportional" (MMP) system. Minority/fringe parties are the only ones who like MMP and in many cases they are the ones who get to decide who the government will be.
Exactly PR=oligarchy of the party leaders
2 advantages of the additional member system over STV. 1. It maintains a clear link between you and your MP. 2. It isn't a preferential system, so if we have a referendum it cannot be legitimately claimed that we have already had a referendum on the matter. It does have 2 potential disadvantages though. 1. It could be less proportional, especially in places like Scotland. 2. It relies on party lists, making it hard to get rid of a disliked politician in a party that has some broad support.
Do your lead-in ads have to begin "Holy Sh**"....very poor taste.
what are ads???
The adds are from TH-cam.
Tories have no chance of winning Hemsworth.
2019 election would show different.
Democracy means that the authority exists because the people wants it. It does not mean something or everything needs to be elected
Who is the person hosting this show???
Britain is a partial democracy.
Creating a fully democratic system would be simple if the largest parties that benefit from the current system cared to change it, which will likely be never.
1 - Switch to a mixed member proportional voting system
2 - Either abolish the House of Lords or reform it into a fully elected body
3 - Abolish the monarchy
4 - Create a written constitution
Not one party reflects my views.
Less than 30% of us bother to vote. I assume this is for that very reason.
Brexit has shown us to be clearly undemocratic.
The actions of all three main parties reguarding brexit has been utterly shameful.
save UK, Democracy is under threat!
It was criminal how ill-informed the country was about PR in the 2011 referendum. I couldn't make head nor tail of the leaflet and I'm not dumb. I reckon people just stuck with what they knew
It seemed simple enough to understand. I think the vast majority of people just preferred the benefits of FPTP.
It wasn't PR.
It was something political science refers to as runoff voting. We labelled that idea as the alternative vote.
The uk is under one system of government.
That is to say no fundamental difference or opinions on how the country should be governed is prompted or introduced to the people. Examples include no islamic teaching or benefits are introduced to the people at young age this is fundamental difference anything so different as this example is never introduced another example no Republicanism is actively promoted or given airtime. This is not because people are not interested in such fundamentally different ideas but it is actively censored or actively distorted in order to silence it.
"House of Commoners" "House of Lords" "House of Windsor/royals"
Brits do not care if they live in democracy, as long as the Queen is around. It is the same as North Korea. The difference on the surface comes from the history; Brits keep on expanding their presence using resources in the US, in which they have gotten retreats, but no defeat, while North Korea was defeated in Korean War, and live in denial since then.
What UK coaltion happpened in 2017? He did say that at 9:00 right?
We had the chance to use proportional representation under the coalition in 2011, but squandered it
That was "Alternative Vote" and it was a waste of time to even put it to the people to vote on as it was a dogs breakfast of a system that nobody really wanted. It was even less proportional than first past the post.
The spinning around portion of the video is nauseating. Please stop it.
2 parties to vote for is not democracy 😢
The workers democratic rights are directly determined by the capitalist levels of profit, the profit motive will always be the ruling factor.
The British electoral system is undemocratic and unrepresentative, the first past the post system hails from an era long past when ordinary people first acquired a vote.....it needs badly to evolve.
Democracy is about representation not competition, elections are not about winning or losing, minority groups need representation as much as the majority.
In Britain significant minorities are at the very least under represented in Parliament, if Britain adopted a fairer P.R. system the crippled political landscape and current democratic stagnation evident in the U.K. would disappear.
Coalition Governments representing both minority and majority groups are the norm in mature democracies across Europe, they are largely successful, indeed it is usually impossible for a single party to secure an overall majority in such parliaments.
Lack of representation has led to the voices of minority groups not been heard and ignored by British Governments over many decades, this has bred frustration and apathy and helped bring Britain to it's present situation.
Democracy needs to mature in Britain. I am an avid and neutral follower of UK politics from another European country.
Where there's complete licence to effectively lie Your way into power with dishonest pledges completely free of accountability what does that tell You?
PR may be fairer, but as history shows, it really does lead to more unstable, less accountable politics. Split the difference and adopt AV.
I think the title of this video is a little incomplete. The first past the post system is flawed, I agree. Funnily enough I thought it had changed, so I am obviously not too up to date!
I assume this was recent footage. The test of our democracy is surely whether the establishment honours the result of the EU referendum. Considering all these other elections is rather irrelevant at the moment.
When these UK or any of the european nations speak about dmemocracy, I just remember my Indian ancestors whom these brits, portuguese or french killed in order to suppress the freedom movement and irony is today they are being vocal about every nation being a democratic nation and a seccular nation where in still most countries still didnt attain freedom till date and are under british rule if you google it. Jallianwalah bagh is one such incident out of many which happened pre independence in India and brits massacred many Indians sadly and it is in our history