"All governments are more or less combinations against the people....and as rulers have no more virtue than the ruled.....the power of government can only be kept within its constituted bounds by a display of a power equal to itself, the collected sentiment of the people."
Benjamin Franklin Bachem in a Phildelphia Aurora editorial 1794
I make no apologies for returning to mount another of my 'hobby-horses' with the title of this post, as it is a state of affairs under which we in this country now live.
Andrew Grice writes in the Independent on the matter of a formal agreement which might be reached by the Conservative and Liberal Democratic parties, following a successful outcome of the AV referendum which is being imposed on the electorate.
Besides being an admission by Cameron and Clegg that their respective parties are a 'tainted' brand, it raises a far more serious matter. Just what is the point in holding a general election if two of the parties involved intend 'rigging' the result beforehand? It is well known that the continual complaint by the electorate for not bothering to vote is that nothing changes - hardly surprising when all three of the Lib/Lab/Con are offering the same policies, but using different words - but do 'they' have to be so blatant about what amounts to more 'gerrymandering'?
As an afterthought I have realised that I should drop the word 'democratised' in any future posts on this subject!