[coldtea]

Those people are thinking just fine. With their wallets.

Why would they prioritize national interests? Because they were elected to do so?

After all they know they were actually elected because people were only given a couple of establishment approved choices, and in their naivety they happened to pick their side this time (after all they alternate between the two choices all the time).

They also know they'll be fine and have their salaries, extras, and nice corporate post-politic sinecures whetever their performance. Just see Blair.

[lotsofpulp]

>After all they know they were actually elected because people were only given a couple of establishment approved choices, and in their naivety they happened to pick their side this time (after all they alternate between the two choices all the time).

Australia has ranked choice voting and mandatory voting. What else could be done to “give” people more choices?

[brainwad]

As an Aussie:

* some kind of proportional representation in lower houses or parliament (see e.g. New Zealand for a Westminster-compatible solution, or Switzerland for something more radical while still working with seats allocated by state populations).

* referendums on laws/treaties, and popular initiatives to propose constitutional changes and/or new laws (like in Switzerland or various western US states).

* reinvigoration of the federal principle that things that can be done by the states (or the local governments) should be done at that level, rather than the feds sticking their nose in everything (see, again, Switzerland).

[coldtea]

>Australia has ranked choice voting and mandatory voting. What else could be done to “give” people more choices?

None of the above are even close to giving people choices.

Australia has a seat-by-seat majority-based system that favors the bigger parties (HoR).

Choices come when there's direct proportional elections.

Choices come when you don't need campaign support, advertising budgets, rich sponsors to be elected.

When they media don't sway to their (owners) favorite parties and candidates.

When you're not elected on an huge laundry list of a program, and then left to do whatever and backtrack on any and all promises until the next election with no consequences.

When there are direct referendums for major issues, regularly, not just to change the constitution in rare cases.

And many many other things besides, those are just some big ones.

[throwaway290]

> Why would they prioritize national interests? Because they were elected to do so?

How about because they are human people like you and me. You don't think you are a bad guy who always does things only in your own interest right? So why do you think they are like that?

How about if they really screw people over they know there will be mass protests

etc.

[coldtea]

>How about because they are human people like you and me

Oh, sweet summer child.

>You don't think you are a bad guy who always does things only in your own interest right? So why do you think they are like that?

Because I wasn't promoted and passed all the exams of a system designed to promote sociopaths, party interests, and corporate/financial/M.I.C. interests, nor did I have the sociopathic self-selection to want to get to the highest offices of power.

[foldr]

Neither was Jeremy Corbyn, but he would have been Prime Minister if enough people had voted for him. Say what you will about him (I am not a fan), but he is not “establishment approved”.

[coldtea]

That's why he "didn't pass all the tests" and was undermined both by the media and by his own parties, and various establishment interests.

[foldr]

You said:

> because people were only given a couple of establishment approved choices

Unless you think Jeremy Corbyn was establishment approved (!), this is clearly not true.

I’m not really sure what to make of your latest comment. Is your preferred world one where the media never criticize your favored politicians and the left wing of the Labour Party ruthlessly crushes internal dissent? If that’s what it would have taken to make Corbyn Prime Minister, then count me out.