Good Morning (or later, depending on your position under the sun), Roy

I would like to offer a different perspective on one of your comments. Note that my purpose is not to be argumentative but for the purpose of encouraging additional responses to expand our understanding of the central theme. In your note, you said:

"I simply cannot get away from the idea that representatives should represent us. I do not see it as reasonable that, in the UK, about 670 people, should decide the fate of the rest of the 60 million population, without regard for the wishes of that population. It may be the way it has always been but I do not give them that right."

Your assertion depends, in part, on your definition of the term "representative"? Lawyers (current biases in the U. S. against the legal profession notwithstanding), advocates, agents and counselors function as representatives. Such people are expected to represent what they perceive to be the best interests of their client. It often happens that the representative's view of what is best for the client differs from the client's view. In fact, such representatives frequently find themselves in the position of advocating the lesser of two evils. If you define the role of your political representative to be an articulator of your view of circumstances or events, that may be a narrowing of the more commonly accepted meaning of the term.

Your inclusion of the phrase, "... without regard for the wishes of that population", alters the discussion. If "representatives" disregard the wishes of their constituency, they are no longer "representative" of that constituency. Your aversion so such (lack of) "representation" is not only valid, it is symptomatic of the failure of so-called "partisan democracy". When the people's representatives are more responsive to a party than to the people, the government can not be called "democratic".

I have been moved, elsewhere, to assert, "The delegation of authority is an essential part of democracy." By this, I mean true democracy must be representative democracy. Not everyone agrees with my view (any discussion of the topic should be done on a separate thread), but, to the extent it is valid, we are foolish not to evaluate the character of those we elect to represent us. If the mechanism by which we elevate people to be our representatives in government produces representatives who act contrary to our wishes, we must consider the mechanism flawed.

I hear no-one investigating, analyzing or identifying the flaws that produce our unresponsive governments. In the spirit of "Know your enemy!", if we do not know the causes of our ills, we can never conquer them. I submit it is important to recognize the anti-democratic nature of partisan politics.

Fred