Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Yeah, I wish it made more sense too.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                 

Pre-emptive Referenda

Avoid a Brumpy ride.
  (+2)
(+2)
  [vote for,
against]

Is your country's next election threatened by the BRump Effect ?

How about a referendum now to let angry social uprisers get the stomping down to a voting booth and making random choices out of their system.

The format would be to have language that implies action will be taken by the government on the outcome. By polling a number of topics, the overall 'vector of change' is diffused and governments have a chance to act on the most important issue rather than the inevitable happening.

In or Out of Europe was a mixed basket of stuff that could have been diffused. Trump or no Trump, well we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Bugger.

Example of referendum form:

Please tick at least one option which most reflects your view. Please read all questions through before answering -

1) Immigration
a) We need immigrants but immigration needs tighter controls
b) No immigration
c) The current system of immigration is ok

2) Refugees
a) We have an obligation to support refugees under the Geneva convention
b) We have an obligation to support refugees under a new reasonable system that realises the current scale of the problem
c) Send them all to America - they caused all the problems.

3) Healthcare
a) It should be based on private insurance
b) It should be publicly funded but a token payment required to visit a doctor (to avoid doctor doctor jokes).
c) The current system is ok.

4) Tax
a) We want less
b) Can be raised a little to support regional regenerative programs. Some government expenses can be recouped by local corporate taxation, for example py charging for training up staff.
c) Can be raised on the principle that if anyone has enough money to buy a smartphone every year, then they have more money than sense.
d) Taxes should be raised so that homelessness and poverty are no longer a problem - everyone will be offered a minimum wage make-work job if they want one (see also b).

5) Moral Aspirations
a) I'm greedy
b) I'm generous
c) I'm supportive
d) I'm opportunistic

bigsleep, Nov 09 2016

Readability score generator https://readability-score.com/
Easy to read. [bungston, Nov 15 2016]

Readability calculator https://www.online-...est_and_improve.jsp
Better. Free. [bungston, Nov 15 2016]

[link]






       //The format would be to have language that implies action will be taken by the government on the outcome.// That pretty much exactly describes the Breferendum we have just had. Viz, the UK is still a full member of the EU.
pocmloc, Nov 09 2016
  

       This isn't about issues, it's about identity.   

       It's not about facts, it's about feelings.   

       So Brexit was about making people feel better by selling them an identity that would stiff it to the establishment, perfectly played out by those establishment figures best able to freely spout whatever best suited the narrative at the time.   

       Same with Trump, he contradicted himself so many times it no longer mattered - the consistent narrative was that he wasn't the establishment.   

       People are (evidently) idiots, we get a global economic recession, and people start voting against their own best interests, based on how the most outrageous, shameless flim-flam men can make them feel.   

       So yes, play out the issues, but it'll only act as fuel for opportunists with the front to promise everything to anyone for the price of their vote.   

       Some Brexiter today said they voted for Brexit because they thought the world was too PC, and all these children were being abused. Confused I know, but they had formed a mental link between not using racial epithets, child molestation and the European Union. Someone else suggested that the Brexit was good because it was something the financial industry didn't want, and all them 'orrible bankers innit. Those of us who've been approaching this rationally have it all wrong - it's no longer about the economy, stupid; it's all about identity, fuckwit.   

       You tell a story and swerve any association with the current round of bogeymen (gipsies, blacks, bankers, single mothers, latinos, bathroom users, email-senders/receivers, syrians, refugees, sex-offenders (mostly), experts, bureaucrats, etc)   

       People are evidently liking protectionism and nationalism right now, it seems, they just need those frankly debunked, demonstrably bad things couched in terms they understand, anti-banking, anti-establishment, anti-globalisation, revolutionary terms.   

       The hardest problem is going to be getting elected and trying to deliver without ending up like Mussolini, hanging from a gibbet after it's all gone tits.   

       But here I am, talking rationally, not joining the flock of the common man. I should be getting swept up in the patriotism and mad abandon of it all - hooray for simple answers to complicated problems, it does feel so good doesn't it!
zen_tom, Nov 09 2016
  

       //So yes, play out the issues, but it'll only act as fuel for opportunists with the front to promise everything to anyone for the price of their vote.//   

       But for a government with a 2 year head start (because they are in power (if it needs spelling out)), a vote for a monster raving loony candidate can be headed off at the pass by managing or acting on public sentiment particularly on the most inflammatory issue. As soon as the public vote for a candiate or mixed bag of issues than it has already gone wrong ... apparently.   

       Votes on the specific, and then votes for the candidates who can enable that if the government of the day doesn't react.
bigsleep, Nov 09 2016
  

       Perhaps it's that mixed bag of issues I'm talking about when I use the word 'identity'. I think if we eeked out the details like this and asked the country to vote on them individually, they'd write it off as boring detail-focused wonkery. I still think you'd get bravado-fuelled swaggerers appearing at the end of the election cycle with a new bag of issues fresh from being concocted - like "it's all rigged", "we need to build a wall/monorail/spaceship", "red/yellow/orange/gold menace", globalisation, XYZ- trade deal, whatever.   

       Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have the chance to pick these things apart and get a clear view of what's what, identify, clearly where the true issue-led mandates lie - but I don't think there's a democratic route, based on party-system politics that gets us there.   

       And yes, you're right the current system is deplorable, so as an alternative, is this a rational and sensible option? Yes of course. And, that is precisely why it could never work. [+]
zen_tom, Nov 09 2016
  

       //but they had formed a mental link between not using racial epithets, child molestation and the European Union//   

       Surprisingly*, there actually is such a link, though it's rather complicated and indirect. Not an iron-law, ineluctable-necessity causal link, but still, a link of sorts. Enough of a link that the person you were talking to might not be a moron after all. Of course, they might be a moron anyway for other reasons. It's hard to tell from this distance.   

       *Well, I was surprised when it occurred to me. And horrified, and rather embarrassed.
pertinax, Nov 15 2016
  

       Brexit was a mixed bag of issues in the sense that what people thought they were voting for was a mixed set of mutually incompatible things: Lower immigration, free movement of UK nationals throughout Europe, not having our laws made in Brussels, free movement of UK goods and services throughout Europe, no trade barriers, inward investment from Europe to create jobs in the UK, more money for the NHS, no reduction in regional grants, multinationals still basing their European headquarters/factories in the UK, etc., etc.
hippo, Nov 15 2016
  

       That's all well and good Bigs but there's a lot of fancy words in that text. The short ones make the most sense. 3c and 4a, for example. I put it thru the readability translator (the questions, not your idea - vector of change??) and got back grade level 8.2. That is fancy talking for the angry crowd.   

       How about you rewrite your questions until you get grade level 4? That's how Trump got his message across. Nothing tougher than 4. Any tougher and you become an incomprehensible tweeting bird. Tweet tweet.   

       Readability translator linked. Any british spellings automatically up grade level by 2.
bungston, Nov 15 2016
  

       Example:   

       5) Moral Aspirations a) I'm greedy b) I'm generous c) I'm supportive d) I'm opportunistic   

       Indication of the number of years of formal education that a person requires in order to easily understand the text on the first reading Gunning Fog index : 16.67   

       Revise to:   

       How I am. 1. I want money. 2. I will give you money. 3. I love you. 4. I will eat you.   

       Indication of the number of years of formal education that a person requires in order to easily understand the text on the first reading Gunning Fog index : 4.61
bungston, Nov 15 2016
  

       //Revise to:// //Readability translator linked//   

       I've not sure you've digested the idea at all. The idea in part of the referendum was to split the concepts of power wielding with e.g. facebook identity. Hence -   

       Current status - "I'm greedy" vs your engine suggestion of "I want money". The former is social media sharing of values, the latter is a psychopathic demand. If your engine is used to e.g. make polarised news more appealling then yes I guess you are just using the right tools to whitewash the subject.   

       Clearly questions 4) and 5) were not about opinion but rather pointy data collection points, but if the populace are going to vote to run off a cliff than its quite important to gather a bit of information as to why they'd want to do that.   

       I forgot I posted this idea but its now become quite topical with Obama warning about some uncomfortable nationalism cropping up all over the place. So this idea was about a solution to that to involve the public on a give and take basis - they can lie if they like on the last 2 questions, or ignore them, but putting immigrants on the same sheet as "Are you just being greedy ?" just starts a bit of thinking and dialogue. I am not sure your right-wing translation service does that justice - people associate greed with evil far more than they do with the want of money so they are very different questions.   

       And lets return to the main point of the idea which is to defuse rampant nationalism with associated bigottry. If you get some kind of referendum out there before the riots start, then that is more empowering that getting Democrats and Republicans to fight in the streets because they don't know how to think - you put the plurality of talking points right there on the ballots ... and not make them about specific candidates.
bigsleep, Nov 16 2016
  

       / right-wing translation service/ !   

       The issue is just comprehension. People do not like to feel stupid and when people try to read things they do not understand it can make those people feel stupid. So they disengage. Your idea may have merit. It is about reasoned discussion. The poorly educated can reason and discuss but these interactions must use terms they understand. Does simplification of terms (dumbing down? If you must.) necessarily entail a political slant? I hope not!   

       And this is why I linked the calculator. The words were mine, the rating its. Can you make your facebook identities comprehensible on a 4th grade level and retain what you feel is important about them?
bungston, Nov 16 2016
  

       I tried again because I did not like the idea that somehow my translation was rightwingedly slanted.   

       How I am. 1: I want. 2: I will give. 3: I am your brother. 4: You are my slave.   

       Gunning Fog Index: 1.6! We can all talk about that!
bungston, Nov 17 2016
  

       Me: 1: I want. 2: I give. 3: I am friend. 4: I own you.   

       fog index: .7111
Voice, Nov 18 2016
  

       Us: 1. Resistance is Futile. You will be Assimilated.   

       Fog index: 0
8th of 7, Nov 18 2016
  

       I am striving to write some prose with a negative Fog index.
bungston, Nov 18 2016
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle