Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
New Political Party
Options
Comments
-
This post has been deleted.0
-
Just want to add that social responsibility is actually encouraged by the free market as a form of marketing. Hence why successful companies do sponsor charities and why they avoid socially dubious activities even when there is no legal requirement. It's to do with freedom to choose. In a liberal society we each have a choice from whom we purchase products or services from and successful companies should reflect the choices that we as free individuals make. It our responsibility to choose to purchase from socially responsible companies, trying to pawn this responsibility off to the government is really only a way of avoiding our own responsibility.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 8278
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
You said "It's hard to argue that this is a system without accountability" and I agreed it's not system without accountability for the perpetrators once discovered. My concern is for those who are the victims of the fraud who watch the company file for bankruptcy the cash long spent on jets to Barbados. If theres a chance that certain kinds of regulation will catch this fraud instead of waiting for it all to blow up in everyones faces then I don't consider that a bad thing. I never suggested you don't think these guys should be punished but that you are happy to let them do as they please and punish then if and when their crimes are discovered. Theres another "if" for you guys.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Not sure what the big distinction is here. I'm not suggesting they march against wars or anything. I'm talking about illegal practices that they may "embrace" when they can get away with it. Are we to assume that Enron was the first and last time a crime like this will be committed?donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Not sure why you used the word sorry there. My tendencies are to the left yes but I'm open to being persuaded on different ideas. Thats why I'm here discussing it. I only mentioned sweatshops as an example. Do they not exist? To dismiss it by saying it's some kind of fantastical throw back to Victorian times is unfair. I will say it's an extreme example and you might persuade me that it would become a genuine thing of the past in a properly overseen free market but you prefer to push the "oh man another lefty" button. John Pilger has made a living out of reporting on the kinds of things corporations get away with. He shouldn't have a career if free markets are so rosy. Of course he is an illogical lefty which probably means he is just reading from Dickens.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
No confusion on my part I don't expect corporations to be anything of the sort. I expect them not to pollute rivers, commit fraud, build things with inferior parts to improve their margins and so on. And I believe it might be better to have structures in place to ensure they don't rather than catching them when too much damage is already done. Again we could discuss this. I'm no economic expert. I have my fears about a free market but I'm happy to be corrected and learn but you've decided I'm a krusty who campaigns outside IMF Annual General Meetings with my dog on a string.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 8278
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Like I said I'm no expert so I'll accept your implication that it's is impossible to prevent fraud or catch it before it does too much damage.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Of course people are innocent until arrested with cause. Should we let people speed in their cars or drive drunk and only arrest them when they kill someone. I was not suggesting anything close to your quote above.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I assume regulation exists because there are practices of regulation that are designed to help stop companies from doing these things. So I don't know why you are asking me this. Fair enough you probably don't think regulation works but I assume many do.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I do if it puts their lives or their health in danger. If they could earn more pushing drugs and left to do so would you have a problem with that?donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Cheers thanks for clearing that up. I do like a reasoned discussion with my peers. Just off to impose my communist ideas on some folks. Oh wait you've covered that....donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
If you think I support communism then we better leave it here I think. Unless I accept your argument I suspect I have to put up with being called a pinko commie in every reply I read.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
You've been arguing for a free market. I'm not going to assume you are arguing for something we already have and neither am I going to assume that it means we currently have a big brother state that you are fighting against. Arguing against a free market or expressing concerns about it does not equate to advocating communism or a police run state.0 -
Advertisement
-
This post has been deleted.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 8278
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Assuming the rules are adjusted when necessary if companies are discovered to have found loopholes I have no problem with this. I am simply voicing concerns and hoping that a freer market as you say doesn't allow more abuse. You are reacting to my concerns by saying I am a Communist.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Going round in circles here a bit. If a persons life is under threat or their health endangered theres nothing wrong with aspiring to improve their lives or their working conditions. If the alternatives are worse it doesn't mean the sweatshops are a solution it means the situation is a bigger problem. It would of course be unfair to say the underlying problem is down to corporations but it worries me when they might be willing to take advantage of these kind of circumstances.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Neither do I but you know thats not what I meant.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
As I've said I'm voicing concerns not writing a manifesto. Unions for example came into existence because workers did need protection not for fun. Most people say they helped ruin the country during the Celtic Tiger but I think they completely lost their way. The Government gave them what they wanted without much argument, they became lazier resting on their laurels and stopped doing their jobs.
For example I work for the public service and we have an embargo on hiring new staff which is fine with me only our manager decided that he wanted a new grade 8 and in came some guy out of nowhere. No interview, no advertisement. imo this is the why a union is there. To go to this guy and say wtf are you at but they've forgotten how do this kind of thing. People associate unions with getting workers more money but it's supposed to be much more than that. It is about protectionism and yes it is also about accepting drops in wages if necessary when the country is in this current state.
They should react to reality and help their members at the same time but they are an empty vessel these days. Employees will always need protection. You may think there are ways to protect them without unions that enable business to function better but I would argue that a good union could protect their members without stifling business.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Look I raised some of my concerns and you've referred to me as a lefty, a communist sympathiser and a believer in a police state. I was not claiming to have the solutions or the alternatives to a freer market. At no point did I say get rid of the free market. Communism failed. Inevitably. But capitalism has an in-built survival mechanism. When something goes wrong we were either doing it wrong, it was down to a few bad eggs or there was too much interference and the market needs to be set free. I'm just a tad suspicious. I think there a balance. Less interference? Maybe. Let Big Business do as it pleases? Not convinced. Stop protecting employees? Worrying.
Anyway I've no definitive solutions so you can have the last post writing me off as a [insert left wing label here].0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 8278
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I respect your beliefs in this but it would be nice if while believing this you didn't assume those who differ with you aren't raving leftys. I think the bloated public service is down to bad management though not necessarily regulation. The Public Service is bloated but it also has a dearth of projects installed by management to enhance their CVs and that serve no real purpose for the community but to win awards from the Chamber of Commerce.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Thats a pretty biased opinion. You must see that you're dislike of unions whether justified or not is blinding you a bit here. Plenty of humanitarian organisations would have issues with sweatshops too. I don't doubt there are people in this with agenda that wouldn't sit well with me but humanitarians do exist and it's a disservice to suggest the only opposition to exploitation of workers is based on self interest in every case.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Well there is that theory about the world bank, crippling loans and so on but hey I'll stop there or I'll get that commie tag poured on me again. I still think it's a bit of a leap to suggest that capitalism and free markets will save these people but to be fair we could probably use our knowledge of where it has gone wrong in the past to help them do a better job than we have as they develop.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Ah yes the US. The best examples of Unions in the world. I don't have much fondness for unions these days but I do believe in the principals that brought them into existence. Thats probably where we differ. I think they can do a better job. You just don't want them to exist.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I said - "Arguing against a free market or expressing concerns about it does not equate to advocating communism or a police run state". Shall we go back and pick the places where I said I was voicing my concerns/fears or concentrate on a quote where I was not talking in the first person?donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I'd be interested to know how it would collapse if there was an inexhaustible supply of workers willing to do this job. Because they wouldn't have the strength to get out and spend their disposable income and stimulate the magical merry-go-round that is the splendiferous capitalist world?0 -
So, donegalfella, where do we sign up to this party of yours?0
-
Advertisement
-
-
This post has been deleted.0
-
daragh.king wrote: »Hi all,
I am sure I am not the only one at the moment sick of the current state of affairs in Irish politics. I believe that there is a real need to have another party in Ireland. Our current choices are so limited we can reallisticly either choose FF or FG and then let them choose some other small party which usually has a very small and focased agenda or interest area to prop them up.
What I would love to achieve is a new party with new ideas and new people who have a passion for making Ireland a fairer and better place.
How I would love to see the party work would be people with an interest in a particular area would work together to create a plan that would improve that area. Then the party can mould these together and create a viable plan for improving everybodys life.
www.amhrannua.com0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Well Id be concerned that they advocate councillors cannot join the Dail until 5 years after they finish in their council, given that most TD's are "promoted" from councils. Such as Varadkar.
What this site suggest is Councillors must prove themselves politically, then take a 5 year break before they can go further. Its just lacks logical thought, and would indicate that the group isn't that pragmatic about things.
Whatever about the jist of policies, I would consider practicability very important.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
-
A movement founded by lawyers attending a conference on Competition Law in Germany, hardly equates with what you are suggesting.
Niall Neligan BL
Secretary, The Liberal Society0 -
There is a guy on the radio at the moment about "direct democracy Ireland". They seem to be the greens but pushing a new voting system.
I wonder where All these new parties stand on the political compass graph?
I am not holding my breath on a futarchy party
The Liberal Society is not a political party, but a progressive policy think tank modeled on the Progressive Policy Institute in Washington. Politically we would be in the centre where the X and Y axis meet.
Regards
Niall Neligan BL
Secretary, The Liberal Society
www.liberals.ie0 -
that liberial picture reminded me of this
http://gagagu.com/xe/files/attach/images/16556/672/016/buddy_christ.jpg
That's very funny:D great picture, thanks for that post.
Regards
Niall Neligan BL
Secretary, The Liberal Society0 -
Advertisement
-
liberalsociety wrote: »What precisely do you mean by "Watered down liberals"?
...Liberals.ie wrote:Liberalism is wedded to the political centre, accepting a third way between the politics of the left and right.
Maybe we have different views on what a liberal movement in Ireland should promote, although you are probably more versed in the meaning of "liberalism" than me.0 -
...
Maybe we have different views on what a liberal movement in Ireland should promote, although you are probably more versed in the meaning of "liberalism" than me.
The great thing about the liberal society is that we are open the different perspectives, variety being the spice of life. Its important for us to listen to your opinions, two important facets of liberalism are tolerance and understanding. Liberalism is perhaps the most evolutionary of political ideologies in so far that it moves with the times, as opposed to the reactionary left and right who are rooted in the past.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Ah yes, I knew donegalfella would be better at replying to that then me
But in all seriousness, what are the goals of this liberal thinktank?0 -
I'm disgusted that you left out Mills.:pac:donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I'm involved with this think tank, btw (I am not liberalsociety though).0 -
But in all seriousness, what are the goals of this liberal thinktank?
The following was posted on Politics.ie, and I think it will answer some of your questions.The Liberal Society is looking for new members, if you are interested please send an email to secretary@liberals.ie and include your name, address, occupation. Membership is open to Irish citizens and citizens of the European Union.
_________________________________________________________________
THE LIBERAL SOCIETY
“Service is the necessary complement of freedom and every right involves a corresponding duty. If free institutions are to work effectively, every citizen must have a sense of moral responsibility towards his fellow men and take an active part in the affairs of the community.”Oxford Manifesto 1947 – The Liberal International
WHO WE ARE
The Liberal Society is a progressive policy think tank that promotes moderate and liberal values and adapts them to the challenges of the information age. As Liberals we believe that government is the servant of law-abiding citizens in equal measure. Government derives its power from the people under the constitution which document should require a true separation of powers to ensure a proper system of checks and balances designed to uphold the rights and interests of the whole of society and not to the advantage of local and vested interest.
We believe that Liberalism is dynamic and based on the evolutionary belief in reform designed to enhance the rights of law abiding citizens and their relationship with government. Liberalism is wedded to the political centre, accepting a third way between the politics of the left and right. Liberal thought is based on moderation and understanding, coupled with the belief that the fundamental guarantee of the rights of the citizen is through the observation and enforcement of the law.
OUR GOALS
(a) To promote progressive policies and meritocracy in Irish Society.
(b) To promote constitutional and legislative reform to ensure greater democracy and transparency in our system of government.
(c ) To promote the teaching and learning of Civics, Law and Politics at primary, secondary and third level education.
(d) To promote economic enterprise while ensuring the dignity and rights of employees
(e) To promote civic pride and social responsibility among our fellow citizens.
(f) To promote democracy, the rule of law, respect for individual liberties and the maintenance of a market economy.
(g) To inform, to educate and to stimulate a new generation of young leaders to promote liberal values and progressive policy in our society.
OUR MISSION
Our mission is to promote a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to uphold the fundamental values of liberty, equality, justice and civility, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. We champion the freedom, dignity and wellbeing of individuals, we acknowledge and respect their right to freedom of conscience and the rights of individuals to develop their talents to the full. We aim to disperse power equally among all citizens, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity.
We believe that the role of the state is to enable all citizens to attain these ideals, to contribute fully to their communities and to take part in the decisions which affect their lives.
We believe in a smaller and more efficient government which delivers quality services and which is the servant of law-abiding citizens in equal measure. Government derives its power from the people under the constitution which document should require a true separation of powers to ensure a proper system of checks and balances designed to uphold the rights and interests of the whole of society and not to the advantage of local and vested interest. We reject the concentration of political power in the hands of the few, believing that only through merit and the promotion of meritocracy can a fair and just society be well and truly founded.
OUR MEMBERS
The Liberal Society was founded on the 29th June 2008 in Potsdam, Germany by Lawyers interested in liberal values, progressive policy and economic reform. Since its foundation, the Society has grown to a hundred and forty members, with representatives in all the main universities and colleges. The Society is open to citizens of the European Union, and includes members from Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, Romania, France and Slovenia. The Society includes among its membership: lawyers, journalists, economists, academics, creative artists and IT professionals. The Society is funded through individual subscription and all work carried out on behalf of the society is voluntary.
The Liberal Society is non-aligned and subscribes to the Liberal International, the world federation of liberal and progressive democratic political parties and movements. Liberal Internation was founded in 1947 to strengthen liberal protection from totalitarianism, facism and communism. It has since become the pre-eminent network for promoting liberalism, individual freedom, human rights, the rule of law, tolerance, equality of opportunity, social justice, free trade and a market economy.
For more about Liberalism see the extract below from the Liberal International Conference which was held at Oxford between 27th-30th November 1997.
_________________________________________________________________
The Liberal Agenda for the 21st Century
Inspired by the founders of the Liberal International who fifty years ago launched the Liberal Manifesto, 475 Liberals from every continent returned to Oxford on 27-*****30 November 1997 to consider Liberal responses to the challenges and opportunities that emerge on the threshold of a new millennium. Twelve years on and in the midst of an international economic downturn, the need to promote liberal values is as important today as it was both in 1947 and 1997.
Over the past 5o years, substantial progress has been made in establishing open societies based upon political and economic liberty. However, there is still a long way to go. New generations have to define liberal priorities in the face of new opportunities and new dangers.
There remain many challenges to Liberalism: from the violation of human rights, from excessive concentrations of power and wealth; from fundamentalist, totalitarian, xenophobic and racist ideologies, from discrimination on grounds of sex, religion, age, sexual orientation and disability; from poverty and ignorance, from the widening gap between rich and poor; from the misuse of new technologies, from the weakening of social ties, from competition for scarce resources, from environmental degradation in an overcrowded world, from organised crime and from political corruption. Our task as Liberals in the 21st Century will be to seek political responses to these new challenges which promote individual liberty and human rights, open societies and economies, and global cooperation.
Our Liberal Values
We reaffirm our commitment to the principles of Liberalism set out in the International Liberal Manifesto of April 1947: that liberty and individual responsibility are the foundations of civilised society; that the state is only the instrument of the citizens it serves; that any action of the state must respect the principles of democratic accountability; that constitutional liberty is based upon the principles of separation of powers; that justice requires that in all criminal prosecution the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, and to a fair verdict free from any political influence; that state control of the economy and private monopolies both threaten political liberty; that rights and duties go together, and that every citizen has a moral responsibility to others in society; and that a peaceful world can only be built upon respect for these principles and upon cooperation among democratic societies. We reaffirm that these principles are valid throughout the world.
Freedom, responsibility, tolerance, social justice and equality of opportunity: these are the central values of Liberalism, and they remain the principles on which an open society must be built. These principles require a careful balance of strong civil societies, democratic government, free markets, and international cooperation.
We believe that the conditions of individual liberty include the rule of law, equal access to a full and varied education, freedom of speech, association, and access to information, equal rights and opportunities for women and men, tolerance of diversity, social inclusion, the promotion of private enterprise and of opportunities for employment. We believe that civil society and constitutional democracy provide the most just and stable basis for political order. We see civil society as constituted by free citizens, living within a framework of established law, with individual rights guaranteed, with the powers of government limited and subject to democratic accountability.
We believe that an economy based on free market rules leads to the most efficient distribution of wealth and resources, encourages innovation, and promotes flexibility.
We believe that close cooperation among democratic societies through global and regional organisations, within the framework of international law, of respect for human rights, the rights of national and ethnic minorities, and of a shared commitment to economic development worldwide, is the necessary foundation for world peace and for economic and environmental sustainability.
The advance of Liberalism, 1947-97
We welcome the progress made over the past fifty years in putting Liberal principles into practice in a growing number of countries:
the return of freedom and democracy to the former communist countries in Europe
the spread of democratic government and the rule of law.
the end of colonialism, with previously-subject peoples gaining the opportunity for self-government.
the retreat of the state from control of national economies, with widespread acceptance that market economies create wealth more effectively and distribute it more widely.
the transformation of education from a privilege for a minority to a life-long process for a rising proportion of citizens.
growing respect for human rights, both within states and as a subject for international oversight and - where necessary - intervention.
a growing national and international awareness of the human rights of women and children.
the extension of the rules of equality to sexual minorities and the recognition that homosexuality and lesbianism are legitimate expressions of personal proclivities.
the consolidation of an open international economy, within an agreed framework of international regulation.
the strengthening of international law and of global and regional institutions.
increased freedom of information, communication and travel, both within and across national boundaries.
acceptance that shared responsibility within the world community extends to a common obligation to tackle world poverty and to protect the global environment.
The challenge for our generation
We recognise that these achievements have been won so far for only a minority of humankind.
The challenges we face in the next fifty years are to build on what has been achieved, to extend the principles of liberalism throughout the world, and to harness the forces of change to consolidate rather than to undermine the development of open societies.
The challenges we face include:
1. The challenge of extending democracy.
Liberal democracy has at last become widely accepted as the global model for political organisation. But only a minority of states are yet properly democratic. Authoritarian regimes, military elites usurping power, abuse of state powers for partisan purposes, criminal elements gaining influence over government, power-seekers exploiting popular hopes and fears, still block the path to liberty. We call on all governments and peoples
* to discriminate in international relations in favour of governments which observe the rules of human rights and democracy;
* to abolish capital punishment all over the world;
* to strengthen the rule of law and to promote good governance within a genuinely democratic framework;
* to redirect public spending from military expenditure towards investment in social capital, sustainability, and the alleviation of poverty;
* to limit the sale of arms, and to prevent the sale of the means of repression to non-democratic regimes, and to promote the effectiveness of the UN register of conventional arms;
* to combat corruption, organised crime and terrorism;
* to promote media free from undue control or interference by government or dominant companies;
* to instil through education the crucial importance of tolerance to the very existence of a civilised society
2. The challenge of violence and of global governance.
In a world filled with violent conflicts, one of the most critical tasks is to find effective means of avoiding violence. An increasingly interdependent world also requires a high standard of international cooperation to promote a secure, sustainable and equitable world order. Transnational crime, intractable disease, environmental pollution and the threat of climate change pose additional challenges for international cooperation. Liberals are committed to strengthen global governance through the United Nations and through regional cooperation. We call on all governments to join in the initiative to establish an international criminal court with jurisdiction over war criminals. Our objective in the 21st century is to build a liberal world order securely based upon the rule of law and backed by appropriate global and regional institutions.
3. The challenge of improving democracy.
We recognise that democratic practices must be extended further to meet the expectations of more educated societies and to protect against disillusionment with representative government. Citizens deserve better access to information, more effective parliamentary controls on executive power, wider opportunities to play an active part in public life and to question their governments. The principle of subsidiarity must be fully respected, to give the maximum autonomy to regions and local communities. Effective decentralisation of political power to self-governing communities remains the best way to empower every citizen.
4. The tension between self-government and human rights.
Self-government, more specifically state sovereignty, can conflict with individual freedom and human rights. Authoritarian regimes abuse the principle of sovereignty to bar intervention to support those who are denied freedom. Liberals insist that human rights are indivisible and universal, and do not depend on citizenship of a specific state, or on membership of a particular ethnic or social group, gender, religion or political party. Adequate sanctions should be found by the international community against governments which refuse to observe the principles of an open international society.
5. The challenge of poverty and social exclusion.
Poverty, unemployment, and social exclusion blight the lives of men and especially of women, children and the elderly, and present major dangers to civil society. Poverty breeds despair and despair breeds extremism, intolerance and aggression. The central question in the alleviation of poverty is how to provide people with the means to fight poverty themselves, to lift themselves out of poverty. We call for an active policy, creating opportunity for education and employment, assistance for those who cannot help themselves, resting upon a partnership between public and private provision. Public institutions and welfare systems must be as flexible and as locally administered as possible, aiming to promote individual responsibility and respond to individual circumstances.
6. The challenge of lean government.
The age-old misconception that it is government's business to organise people's happiness is heading for crisis, if not collapse, all over the world. In most industrialised countries, exaggerated and ill-targeted systems of social security and redistribution threaten to break down, and state budgets to impose ever-increasing debt burdens on future generations. In developing countries, attempts to promote development exclusively or predominantly by government action are bound to fail, through overloading government and stifling private initiative, the only factor that can produce really sustainable development. Liberals recognise that the capacity of government is limited, that 'big government' and the growth of state expenditure are themselves serious threats to a free society, and that limiting the scope of government and retrenchment of government spending must therefore be given priority.
7. The need for a new contract between generations.
We recognise the tensions between the immediate pressures of demand and consumption and the long-term interests of community and environment, with which governments as trustees for society must be concerned. We seek a new contract between generations, recognising the benefits which current consumers and citizens have received from earlier investment and the responsibilities they carry to maintain and renew the natural environment, cultural treasures, public assets and social capital for future generations. Prices should reflect the underlying costs of pollution and of the exploitation of natural resources.
8. The challenge of scientific and technological progress.
We welcome the economic and social opportunities presented by new technologies and scientific innovation. But we also recognise the need for public scrutiny of their potential impact, and misuse, and for national and international regulation. The precautionary principle should be the governing principle in all sectors of human activity. This is particularly true for the threat of climate change, which mankind has to address immediately. Binding agreements and timetables for substantial reductions of the consumption of fossil fuels are urgently needed. Consumption must be kept within the regenerative capacities of the ecosystems. All chemicals, genetically engineered substances and industrial products should be carefully tested before they are commercially utilised. We also welcome the revolution in communications, which offers new opportunities to promote creativity, decentralisation, and individual autonomy and initiative. Liberals insist upon diverse channels of communication, provided through competition in the open market. Information, networks and other communication structures must be widely accessible, with open systems for producers and consumers and public interest bodies.
9. The challenge of creating open markets.
Open societies need open markets. A liberal, open and tolerant society requires a market economy. Political freedom and economic freedom belong together. With the markets of ideas and innovations, with the competition for the best solution, the market economy creates a dynamic progress that provides the best opportunity for an independent life. With the underlying principle of private property and a legal framework to prevent monopolies, open markets generate private initiative and the economic means for social assistance. Bureaucratic regulations of market economics and protectionism are therefore barriers for new chances and new jobs in developing countries as well as in the industrialised world.
In order to achieve an ecologically and socially sustainable development the emphasis should be shifted from taxation of labour to taxation of energy and raw material consumption. Without such a change the environmental problems and the unemployment will continue to increase.
10. The challenge of world-wide development.
Corrupt and authoritarian government, weak states and societies, unemployment, impoverishment, illiteracy, and over-population all contribute to environmental degradation, generate flows of migrants and refugees, and provoke revolts against political and social order. It is in the long-term self-interest of the developed world to encourage human progress, and assist economic development within poor countries; it is also a moral responsibility. Since open global markets best serve to promote prosperity, within both rich and poor countries, Liberals will have to aggressively re-emphasise, and to the best of their ability implement, their firm conviction that free trade, by giving the best opportunities to the economically weak, is the safest way towards overcoming poverty in the world. Resistance to economic protectionism therefore remains a key Liberal commitment.
At the dawn of the 21st century we commit ourselves as Liberals to work together to meet these challenges. We reaffirm the Liberal commitment to place the freedom and dignity of every human being at the centre of our political life.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Damn right - I didn't read "On Liberty" for nothing!donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Thanks to the minister. I can see what ye stand for (and some like better separation of powers Im 100% for), but what exactly are ye going to do to try and introduce this change? What do members of the group contribute?
I would assume that natural role for a group wanting change would be to run candidates for electoral office with a view to influencing the "powers that be".
Im reading the "manifesto" as such, and I dont see how ye can describe yourself as centrist when ye are trying to reduce the size of government? Isnt that not a right-ish wing thing to advocate? Or am I just misjudging centrist as FF (who I know some think are socialist leaning which I suppose they are).0
:D:D
Advertisement