| ▲ | graemep 3 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
I think that one problem is that politicians defer too much to "experts" in decisions like this. I cannot remember who it was, but one British prime minister, when told by intelligence services that they needed greater surveillance powers, told them essentially, that of course they would claim that, and firmly refused. Politicians now mostly lack the backbone. That does not stop them ignoring expert advice when it is politically inconvenient, of course. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | psychoslave 3 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The problem is not they ask experts. Politicians are so utterly incompetent on the thing they are putting law on, at the level they will believe openoffice is a firewall[1]. That doesn’t mean all of them are that blatantly unaware of the basics for which they are supposed to decide of some rule, but that is definitely a thing. The next thing is, do they know how to rely efficiently on a diverse panel of expert, or do they take only yes-man/lobby-funded experts around them? On a deeper level, are they accountable of the consequences of their actions when they enforce laws which any mildly skilled person in the field could tell will have disastrous side effects and not any meaningful effect on the (supposedly) intended goal? What we need is direct democracy, where every apt citizen have a duty to actively engage in the rules applied without caste exception. Let’s protect children, yes. What about making sure not any stay without a shelve to pass the winter[2]? Destroying the right of private conversation except for the caste which decide to impose that for everyone else is the very exact move to offering children a brighter future. [1] https://framablog.org/2009/04/02/hadopi-albanel-pare-feu-ope... [2] https://www.nouvelobs.com/societe/20240919.OBS93798/en-europ... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||