On removing government.

[Audley Strange]

Most democratic governments are, wisely, fixed term. However, I'm wondering if there is any way that the populace can remove a Government from power within that fixed term, if say parliament was suddenly filled with a group of total morons who just openly exploited their position. But is there any kind of political failsafe or killswitch we can use in that case? Can we call an automatic no confidence referendum if we get enough signatures? Is there some way to have them removed through the judicial system or even a magic whistle to call the Generals in?

I'm not sure we have anything like that in the U.K. but I'm wondering do other nations? If so what mechanisms are in place so your country doesn't turn into Syria?

[Azathoth]

The reigning monarch can dissolve parliament. It would have to go that route probably

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...if say parliament was suddenly filled with a group of total morons who just openly exploited their position...

As opposed to..?

[Tero]

Depends on country and election cycle. You have to get it on the ballot.

[Pappa]

I'm sure a dedicated campaign from someone like Rupert Murdock to push for an early election would be very effective.

[Rum]

The only legal way in the UK is if the current government suffers a defeat in a vote of no confidence in Parliament. They are obliged to quite in those circumstances. It has happened in the past - here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motions_of ... ed_Kingdom

The queen technically dissolves parliament and I imagine there are are other unusual circumstances in which she has the power to do so - say if the PM goes totally bonkers or some such.

[Svartalf]

Most democratic governments are, wisely, fixed term. However, I'm wondering if there is any way that the populace can remove a Government from power within that fixed term, if say parliament was suddenly filled with a group of total morons who just openly exploited their position. But is there any kind of political failsafe or killswitch we can use in that case? Can we call an automatic no confidence referendum if we get enough signatures? Is there some way to have them removed through the judicial system or even a magic whistle to call the Generals in?

I'm not sure we have anything like that in the U.K. but I'm wondering do other nations? If so what mechanisms are in place so your country doesn't turn into Syria?

That's why they invented insurrection, rebellions, revolts and revolutions for.

We might end up with a better political class if the price of failure, stupidity and/or corruption was to be strung up by their own neckties... and hope it doesn't break because if it does, you're falling into the tyre and garbage fire lit under you.

[Robert_S]

The reigning monarch can dissolve parliament. It would have to go that route probably

They should amend the law to allow the use of shark tank instead, it's better for the environment than dumping the lot of them into a vat of sulfuric acid.

[Svartalf]

Woodchipper, feet first, and use the remains as either fertilizer or pig feed.

[Audley Strange]

The only legal way in the UK is if the current government suffers a defeat in a vote of no confidence in Parliament. They are obliged to quite in those circumstances. It has happened in the past - here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motions_of ... ed_Kingdom

The queen technically dissolves parliament and I imagine there are are other unusual circumstances in which she has the power to do so - say if the PM goes totally bonkers or some such.

Yeah I know that, but those are internal processes. I'm looking to see if we have the security measure in place where the public can somehow call a vote of no confidence. We all know democracies can end up with crazy bastards in power and in essence we are entirely culpable for putting them in power, as such we should have the ability to remove their mandate quickly in the event they are dangerous.

It's like revolution, yes that's an option, but that should only be necessary if they refuse to go. Do we have killswitches? If not why not? Is it a stupid idea or not? I'm actually pondering whether or not this might actually be something that protects democracy.

I dunno.

[amused]

This doesn't really answer your question, but I think the long-term solution is education - both of the voters and the elected. Which would mean a thoughtful presentation of the issues and positions so voters could really understand the consequences of their vote. It 'could' happen.

Even better is a requirement for a minimum education level for politicians, and requirements for continuing education in things such as finance, ethics, history and economics. The government of any one nation is usually the largest enterprise in operation there, it deserves to be run by competents.

[Svartalf]

We've been educating the voters for nearly 150 years, and they are still as stupid as they were back when Napoleon the lesser ruled by plebiscite.

[Hermit]

Even better is a requirement for a minimum education level for politicians, and requirements for continuing education in things such as finance, ethics, history and economics. The government of any one nation is usually the largest enterprise in operation there, it deserves to be run by competents.

As if such education would lead to "The Truth" and wise government. Politicians well versed in economics and finance might be of the Friedmanite, Keynesian or Marxist persuasion. Similarly incompatible flavours exist in ethics and history. Education will not necessarily result in better government. It'll just result in better dispute. That's the best thing we can hope for, and it will only be better if voters are also better educated. Not likely to happen with the tabloid media's offerings and the tendency of the majority to check the sports pages first.

[Audley Strange]

Good point. In fact such a good point I wonder if the public are responsible enough to be trusted to have access to the very killswitch they should have.

However if we cannot trust the public, why do we hang on to democracy exactly?

[Svartalf]

Demagoguery in disguise?