How can we improve political awareness and education?
by admin 10:22pm, 7 November 2007
You will need to login
or sign up to do that
One of the major issues identified at a 'World Cafe' gathering of 300 people in May 2007 was the need to improve political awareness and education. How can we achieved better awareness and engagement in the system?
This discussion topic is closed. You can still review the discussion but it will no longer accept comments or votes.
Relates to
document:
World Cafe Summary Document (92.5 KB)
greenade Comment 1
10:46pm, 8 November 2007
8
2 
unbiased media, school curriculum and freedom of speech.. (TRUE freedom of speech.. not the parody of this that is present in our current system)
ballotsmith Comment 1.1
6:01pm, 10 December 2007
0
0
Sure greenade! But how? Any ideas?
dan28 Comment 2
8:33am, 11 November 2007
10
0
Someone on the Senator Online page was advocating votes on moral issues taking place alongside election ballots. This wold give a direct interest in each ballot. I also think that the voting system should change. The upper hous ballot is very hard to follow. In this day and age there should be computers in the polling booths to allow us tolearn about what each candidate stands for before voting.
ballotsmith Comment 2.1
3:11pm, 23 November 2007
1
0
Senate voting is a shambles because of the party system.
ballotsmith Comment 2.2
10:05am, 30 November 2007
0
0
Senators are supposed to represent their own state in Canberra, to offset the latter's power - especially its acquired taxing powers.
But senators have drifted to party allegiance, defeating the purpose of the constitution. .
The states must be guarded against hubris in Canberra - Rudd included - to resolve the ongoing silly tussles between Canberra and the states over hospitals and education etc. How?
Germany was given a new constitution after the war and the states 'appoint' the 'senators'. This produces a balanced cooperative federalism we should copy.
It would also eliminate the nonsense of the many single issue parties and the whole senate voting shambles.
As to the single issues; when we have got rid of the parties these matters will be effectively canvassed in the local MP meetings and in the lower house in Canberra where these matters properly belong.
fullobeans Comment 3
6:19pm, 13 November 2007
4
7
How about demanding that all voters sit a basic test before they are allowed to vote. That will remove the need to educate those who are not interested and riase the level of political debate at a stroke.
salvo Comment 3.1
8:24pm, 13 November 2007
7
0
To me that is such an elitist idea it is almost offensive. Many of those who most need help in life would not have a vote under such a system and if that were the case why would Government help these people? We all need a voice. I commend the New Democracy people for trying to make those voices louder
ballotsmith Comment 3.1.1
10:07am, 30 November 2007
1
0
I certainly agree with you salvo
adam Comment 4
8:50pm, 16 November 2007
6
2
The role of the media is critical here. As long as most of the population gets its news in 5 second grabs there will be no in depth analysis of issues. People are quite capable of processing and thinking about the vast majority of issues facing our society but as long as we (unless you watch SBS or ABC) are subjected to 'news lite' that suits only those with acute attention defecit disorder, the level of political debate will remain facile.
Crispin Comment 4.1
8:36am, 18 November 2007
3
2
I wouldn't exclude the ABC from the "news lite" phenomenon.
greenade Comment 4.1.1
9:51am, 21 November 2007
2
1
the 7.30 report is OK, but agree, the news can be a bit light on. as for the other stations, the reporting of "news" like a celebrity trash magazine is sickening. obviously the "big players" like to keep people as dumb as possible.. easier to control that way.
dan28 Comment 4.1.1.1
10:24pm, 22 November 2007
2
0
I agree with your distaste for celebrity trash but dont see it as a conspiracy, in fact it is more the opposite - it is what you get when there is no plan to raise the level - it is laziness in journalism
greenade Comment 4.1.1.1.1
9:49pm, 27 November 2007
1
0
I was speaking from the perspective of who OWNS the media, rather than from the perspective of the individual journalist. probably both issues need to be taken into account. The fact is, when powerful people own the media, there is no chance of unbiased reporting. Any journalist who steps out of line gets the sack.
dan28 Comment 4.1.2
10:22pm, 22 November 2007
3
0
ABC radio is still pretty good. AM, PM and the World Today are all fantastic shows. I also think Lateline is excellent especially when Virginia Triolli hosts - she might be a bit of a tory but she is a fantastic interviewer
ballotsmith Comment 4.1.3
10:41am, 30 November 2007
0
0
Crispin,
You have a point, but the ABC is compromised by government financial coersion, and interference at board and management level.
Certainly, not every program is ....... well, helpful.
Luther Comment 4.2
12:12pm, 23 November 2007
3
0
Why is current Australian history and politics not taught in our high schools to all students? Each citizen should be taught how our system operates so that they can come to an informed view when it comes to casting their vote. If we are to have a citizenship test then it should include a component on how our electoral system works so that prospective citizens understand both their rights and obligations as Australians.
taimorh Comment 4.3
2:10pm, 23 November 2007
2
1
I think some of these comments are actually off the mark in two ways! First, education implies a level of objective neutrality - something I don't think can be achieved by editorial news. Its the wrong expectation to think that Kerry O'Brien can't take an interview a certain direction because he must maitain neutrality. This in my mind is the wrong direction. Second, the need for simplicity, is cause and effect... Time, retention, common understanding are all factors. Our posts for example are brief and short, though I suspect all of us could spend hours dicussing these issues in peson. Third, I think education is the responsiblity of government not the media and infact giving that expectation or mandate to the media actually opens up more questions of potential bais, etc.
In the context of this forum we should be thinking about how we can set up a new government agency (for exmaple) that provides the different arguments and facts on different issues (eg via the web, with a similar voting or link system to wikipedia) that allows people to inform themselves on policy issues and government decisions. Teh questions is can it be done and managed independtly?
Soichiro Comment 4.3.1
1:50pm, 26 November 2007
1
0
Media free of Government control holds an important place in our politics. It has power and advantage for those who own/wield it, and therefore responsibility.
The Govt should be responsible for the institutions that educate (and Aust history should be a common thread through all school year curriculum), but should be at arms length from the elected Govt's policy and agenda makers.
Govt should also be responsible for the maintenance of a media voice free of commercial influence, but likewise should be at arm’s length from editorial influence.
That said , perfect impartiality is not a cost effective reality . But we should be making a concerted effort to achieve a semblance of it anyway.
taimorh Comment 5
2:01pm, 23 November 2007
3
0
First, the two are very different things! Education in my mind is about citizenship, rights, responsiblities, governance, systems and legislation, etc. Awareness is more about participation either through policial invovlement or an interest through news, articles, etc. In a process of tring to develop our democartic system I think this seperation needs to be acknowledged and then acted on.
Second, in answer I would argue that citizneship edeucation at grade 10-12 (as proposed by Keating) should be considered seriously. I dont think the media has as much to do with this, as much as we would like it to and their is a difference. I guess my answer in response to other comments would be why do we expect a private media to be unbiased and why do we expect them to provide eudcation functions that are not there responsiblity and quite clearly goverments.
ballotsmith Comment 5.1
10:24am, 30 November 2007
0
0
Education and awareness. Yes I agree Taimorh. These all depend on this sites primary goal. If we get rid of the parties and their suffocating effect on the population, we can be confident of rapid progress in all useful areas.
While the predominance of the media will diminish, all media will become more relevant to the greater popular interest and thoughtful participation.
ballotsmith Comment 6
3:07pm, 23 November 2007
4
0
Simple. Connect the public to parliament.
The WILL happen, but first MPS must become independent by only voting in parliament by ballot.
The electorate will come alive very fast.
Soichiro Comment 6.1
1:58pm, 26 November 2007
3
0
MPs (particularly Federal) need to be more closely connected to voters.
Is there a reason why we have to spread our political talent so thinly between local/state and federal governments?
Perhaps local councils should include the local state and federal upper house representatives?
I assume by "ballot" you mean secret ballot? that would help dilute the strong party machine influence we are currently inflicted by.
ballotsmith Comment 6.1.1
6:09pm, 10 December 2007
1
0
Yes soichiro, Ballot means secret ballot - always I think. We need open debate (no party room decisions) and secret ballots for the vote in parliament. Without the latter we will always be ruled by the outcome of private party room debate and decisions.
Sorry for the belated answer.
alan Comment 7
9:27am, 29 November 2007
1
0
Awareness and education are different. Awareness alerts one to the issue, whereas education involves a process of recieving, flitering and processing information.Awareness can be ad hoc, and play to the indiviuals own values and predicaments. Education is active and measureable. I think civics education is very important but the state curriculum bodies are various in their approach to this. eg, In NSW its covered in History and then only barely. In other states its more thorough.
Peter Cunningham Comment 8
8:35am, 10 February 2008
0
0
HOW? It's a simple answer, but very difficult to achieve because it usually involves civil insurrection to achieve. I hold up my hand now that I am an active member of the Liberty and Democracy Party of Australia (www.ldp.org.au), but this comment is not spruiking for the LDP.
Answer: Change the entire system of governance in Australia into Participatory Democracy, and one where a level of government is removed.
This means a dramatic move to reject the existing antagonistic system, and replace it with a Participatory Democracy along the lines of Switzerland, where people who CHOOSE to become involved in the destiny of their nation, or shire (region, canton - whatever).
I don't want to appear some arrogant know-all, but the word DEMOCRACY stems from two Greek words (1) DEMOS = People and (2) KRATOS = Rule.
The system we suffer, yet have no choice but continue to support, is far removed from anything remotely like "People Rule".
We suffer a Parliamentary Democracy and an archaic and conflict oriented, "two party system" (in otherwords - an oligarchy), where one of two main parties will manipulate us for the next few years. The people we elect are loyal not to we dumb bunnies who elected them, but the agenda and dogma of their party.
During term of office, we - the ones who elected them, suffer ALL their mechinations as they strut around quoting "Mandate", when there is no such thing given them. We may well vehemently disagree with 99% of the policies of a party, but a single overarching issue that gains our vote, then condemns us to accepting the things we loathe. Worse - there is no mechanism where mid term, people can effectively have input into other issues.
Remember Juvenal's "Panim et Circenses" = Give them bread and circuses.
That is why things won't change. The majority of people are fed grain, so they peck here and there whilst the wolves pick them off one at a time.
Those in control deliberately fragment the nation in order to better control them.
The solution is there, but until peoples backs are against the wall and they must fight to change it all, then nothing will change.
History teaches us many things, and that rather pessimistic view is one of them.
Peter Cunningham