Crosswords3 mins ago
The Thoughts Of Sir David Attenborough, Which Do You Agree With?
63 Answers
http://
/// Sir David told the Radio Times: "What we mean by Parliamentary democracy is surely that we find someone we respect who we think is probably wiser than we are, who is prepared to take the responsibility of pondering difficult things and then trust him or her to vote on our behalf.” ///
/// Chiming in on immigration, Sir David said: "It’s very easy, as we all know, to be very tolerant of minorities until they become majorities… you find they’re actually telling you what to do and they’ve actually taken over the town council and what you thought was your home isn’t. I’m not supporting it, I’m saying it’s what it is." ///
/// Sir David told the Radio Times: "What we mean by Parliamentary democracy is surely that we find someone we respect who we think is probably wiser than we are, who is prepared to take the responsibility of pondering difficult things and then trust him or her to vote on our behalf.” ///
/// Chiming in on immigration, Sir David said: "It’s very easy, as we all know, to be very tolerant of minorities until they become majorities… you find they’re actually telling you what to do and they’ve actually taken over the town council and what you thought was your home isn’t. I’m not supporting it, I’m saying it’s what it is." ///
Answers
“The indigenous population of Britain are lazy when it comes to voting in local
12:55 Tue 01st Nov 2016
With regard to Sir David's first quote, he is referring to the perfect scenario, and as Sir David has lived a lot longer than I have, I am sure he reached the same conclusion as me, but much earlier, that the perfect scenario is a long way away from the real world in which we all live.
With regard to his second quote, I find nothing to argue with there - he is a wise intelligent compassionate man whom I much admire.
With regard to his second quote, I find nothing to argue with there - he is a wise intelligent compassionate man whom I much admire.
I fully agree with his point regarding local councils. The indigenous population of Britain are lazy when it comes to voting in local elections. You then get groups of people who are driven by their beliefs who use this apathy to take control by getting their own supporters to vote them in.
The general public then kick up a fuss but by then it is too late.
The general public then kick up a fuss but by then it is too late.
AOG - //ichkeria
/// He's right on the first point. ///
Oh so you also think that the British people are not wise enough to make such important decisions? //
Once again my "So ..." rule is proven - the rule that states - If you are going to argue a point by stating something that the original poster didn't actually say, and than argue as if they did say it, you must start your post with a 'So .. '.
You have prefaced your response with a 'So...', and then proceeded to disagree with something that Ichkeria didn't actually say!
/// He's right on the first point. ///
Oh so you also think that the British people are not wise enough to make such important decisions? //
Once again my "So ..." rule is proven - the rule that states - If you are going to argue a point by stating something that the original poster didn't actually say, and than argue as if they did say it, you must start your post with a 'So .. '.
You have prefaced your response with a 'So...', and then proceeded to disagree with something that Ichkeria didn't actually say!
“The indigenous population of Britain are lazy when it comes to voting in local elections.”
No they are not. They simply don’t want to waste their precious time casting a vote to legitimise a bunch of self-serving shysters and busybodies. There is no need for local “government” in the UK and all that votes do is to give those with their snouts in the trough a sense of aggrandisement.
The original idea of electing a member of the House of Commons was that you chose a representative to argue your case on various topics which the House debated and voted on. You did not elect him because you thought he was wiser than you. You elected him to lobby on your behalf in the hope that Parliament would carry out your wishes. This principle has been lost and it is clear from the EU issue (where 52% of voters chose “Leave” but about 70% of MPs are Remainers) that there is a complete disconnect between the electorate and their MPs. The issue of the UK’s sovereignty (for that’s what the EU issue is) is far too important to leave to the 650 “wiser heads”. The nation’s sovereignty is not a matter for them to use as a bargaining tool when conducting shady deals behind closed doors with foreigners. Whether they agree or not with the UK’s membership of the EU is not the point; it is what the people want that counts and the referendum result clearly demonstrated that MPs are somewhat out of touch with their constituents.
As a naturalist Sir David has no modern day equal. But as a philosopher on matters constitutional he has the same as me – one vote. Sorry if my vote to leave cancelled his out but, as he knows from his studies, life’s a bit tough sometimes.
No they are not. They simply don’t want to waste their precious time casting a vote to legitimise a bunch of self-serving shysters and busybodies. There is no need for local “government” in the UK and all that votes do is to give those with their snouts in the trough a sense of aggrandisement.
The original idea of electing a member of the House of Commons was that you chose a representative to argue your case on various topics which the House debated and voted on. You did not elect him because you thought he was wiser than you. You elected him to lobby on your behalf in the hope that Parliament would carry out your wishes. This principle has been lost and it is clear from the EU issue (where 52% of voters chose “Leave” but about 70% of MPs are Remainers) that there is a complete disconnect between the electorate and their MPs. The issue of the UK’s sovereignty (for that’s what the EU issue is) is far too important to leave to the 650 “wiser heads”. The nation’s sovereignty is not a matter for them to use as a bargaining tool when conducting shady deals behind closed doors with foreigners. Whether they agree or not with the UK’s membership of the EU is not the point; it is what the people want that counts and the referendum result clearly demonstrated that MPs are somewhat out of touch with their constituents.
As a naturalist Sir David has no modern day equal. But as a philosopher on matters constitutional he has the same as me – one vote. Sorry if my vote to leave cancelled his out but, as he knows from his studies, life’s a bit tough sometimes.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.