Comments on: Brexit: a failure of political leadership https://www.policyforum.net/brexit-failure-leadership/ The APPS Policy Forum a public policy website devoted to Asia and the Pacific. Thu, 08 Dec 2016 05:37:38 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.7 By: Stephen Cheung https://www.policyforum.net/brexit-failure-leadership/#comment-7757 Tue, 01 Nov 2016 17:33:04 +0000 http://www.policyforum.net/?p=11094#comment-7757 I think our democracy is overrated. Let the majority decide is flawed. The main reason is people casting the votes don’t have enough info to decide; it is based on emotion than reason. In a democratic election, the chosen may not have a genuine interest in serving the people; they serve their own interests. The two interests often at odds. Good luck, my American friends; you will likely be disappointed either way, Trump, or Clinton. Should we not consider other alternative? Like a group of decision makers to decide something so important? Of course there will be problems; but if that is the direction to be taken, there should be solution. The key is make it accountable.

]]>
By: James https://www.policyforum.net/brexit-failure-leadership/#comment-7281 Wed, 29 Jun 2016 01:19:56 +0000 http://www.policyforum.net/?p=11094#comment-7281 This is sanctimonious and self righteous.

So in your view the voters are dumb and need to be told how to think by elites such as yourself? Give me a break. The mob in the UK worked out they were being sold a pup by the unaccountable Eurocrats and flipped them the bird. If “Remain” had such a compelling case they would have got more people off their backsides and got them to vote. Sadly they did not. By ascribing racism to the “Leave” voters is offensive and derogatory to their sensibilities. I expect better from an Australian academic.

]]>
By: Matt https://www.policyforum.net/brexit-failure-leadership/#comment-7280 Wed, 29 Jun 2016 01:15:18 +0000 http://www.policyforum.net/?p=11094#comment-7280 “But how democratic is it if really big decisions are made by a narrow majority of voters? Should a fundamental change in a country, be it independence or a new constitution or a major change to the laws of the land be decided by a 50 per cent plus one vote? In other words, should a bigger majority be required to fundamentally change the status quo? Or should the vote need to be confirmed in a second referendum a month later?”

What rubbish. The UK was asked whether it wanted to join the Economic Community decades ago; they were never asked to become part of a new super-state. If anything, if one applies ethics to your logic, there needed to be a massive vote for the UK to remain in the EU.

]]>