Wall Street Journalin kommenttipalstalla totuus siitä mitä Suomen politiikka on ollut jo pitkään :
"There has been a lot of confusion what this vote was about. It was a bit of this-and-that, but mostly it was because a lot of finns were tired of The Concensus.
The Concensus? Sounds harmless enough, but is actually quite ingenious device for totally separating power from responsibility. It has been used in finnish politics so much that there is really a question whether we are a proper democracy anymore. To outsiders it comes up as stability, to many finns it's just tyranny. I'll tell you how it works.
There was a three-party system before True Finns came up to the scene. Let's say a party A wanted to pass laws 1 and 2. Two other parties were either indifferent or hostile towards those laws. Party B wants to pass laws 3, 4 and 5, to which other parties are either indifferent or hostile. Party C wants a promise that issues 6 and 7 are not to be touched in this parlament.
Party leaders meet behind closed doors (one such meeting is called keskiviikkokerho, "the wednesday-club") and start discussing these issues. They trade: you support this law and we support that law. You want this law passed, but your voters would punish you for that - we'll push for that law if you do the same for our law here that would hurt us if it would be seen as our idea.
Fine enough, but then comes the trick. When the parties exit the meeting, they say they all agree. They see that things have to go this way, because there is no alternative -- there is only concensus. Laws 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have to be passed - it's for the best - and issues 6 and 7 should not be touched in any situation. After the parties have agreed what to support and what not, party voting dicipline dictates that all congressmen have to vote for the party line.
You probably see now why this is bad. A voter has no way of knowing who supports what, who is behind which law and who truly opposes what. This makes voting useless. Even an educated person could not make an educated voting decision.
Then came the True Finns. A left-leaning populist party leader Soini felt like there was political potential opposing The Concensus. They started disagreeing with it. And there was much to disagree with. A stupid law after stupid law and a stupid decicion after a stupid decision. Each affecting relatively few people, but all those people had only one choice: True Finns.
- According to a new law, a small cottage in the middle of a forest, kilometers away from a nearest water system has to buy 2.000-10.000e mini-waste water treatment plant that does not work in finnish climate - to "save the environment" of course. The Concensus forced this into law, the True Finns were the only ones who opposed.
- Bailout for PIIGS. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- Tightening the gun law. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- Sacrifices have to be made to save us from Climate Change. We have to sign to every anti-climate change treaty there is. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- E10-fuel to replace E95. People are unsure what it will do to their cars, so they start to use E98. The Concensus wants to make people use E10 with a stick (raise the already-ridiculous tax rate on E98 even more). True Finns disagree.
- Immigration is handled in a way that is best for the finnish taxpayer. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
...and so on.
True Finns soared because it is only the second party on our quite corrupted political system - the only true alternative to the other party: The Concensus."
Toisin sanottuna PS on ainut vaihtoehto korruptiota, NWO-himoja ja muuta paskaa vastaan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703864204576310851503980120.html#articleTabs=article
"There has been a lot of confusion what this vote was about. It was a bit of this-and-that, but mostly it was because a lot of finns were tired of The Concensus.
The Concensus? Sounds harmless enough, but is actually quite ingenious device for totally separating power from responsibility. It has been used in finnish politics so much that there is really a question whether we are a proper democracy anymore. To outsiders it comes up as stability, to many finns it's just tyranny. I'll tell you how it works.
There was a three-party system before True Finns came up to the scene. Let's say a party A wanted to pass laws 1 and 2. Two other parties were either indifferent or hostile towards those laws. Party B wants to pass laws 3, 4 and 5, to which other parties are either indifferent or hostile. Party C wants a promise that issues 6 and 7 are not to be touched in this parlament.
Party leaders meet behind closed doors (one such meeting is called keskiviikkokerho, "the wednesday-club") and start discussing these issues. They trade: you support this law and we support that law. You want this law passed, but your voters would punish you for that - we'll push for that law if you do the same for our law here that would hurt us if it would be seen as our idea.
Fine enough, but then comes the trick. When the parties exit the meeting, they say they all agree. They see that things have to go this way, because there is no alternative -- there is only concensus. Laws 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have to be passed - it's for the best - and issues 6 and 7 should not be touched in any situation. After the parties have agreed what to support and what not, party voting dicipline dictates that all congressmen have to vote for the party line.
You probably see now why this is bad. A voter has no way of knowing who supports what, who is behind which law and who truly opposes what. This makes voting useless. Even an educated person could not make an educated voting decision.
Then came the True Finns. A left-leaning populist party leader Soini felt like there was political potential opposing The Concensus. They started disagreeing with it. And there was much to disagree with. A stupid law after stupid law and a stupid decicion after a stupid decision. Each affecting relatively few people, but all those people had only one choice: True Finns.
- According to a new law, a small cottage in the middle of a forest, kilometers away from a nearest water system has to buy 2.000-10.000e mini-waste water treatment plant that does not work in finnish climate - to "save the environment" of course. The Concensus forced this into law, the True Finns were the only ones who opposed.
- Bailout for PIIGS. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- Tightening the gun law. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- Sacrifices have to be made to save us from Climate Change. We have to sign to every anti-climate change treaty there is. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
- E10-fuel to replace E95. People are unsure what it will do to their cars, so they start to use E98. The Concensus wants to make people use E10 with a stick (raise the already-ridiculous tax rate on E98 even more). True Finns disagree.
- Immigration is handled in a way that is best for the finnish taxpayer. The Concensus agrees, True Finns disagree.
...and so on.
True Finns soared because it is only the second party on our quite corrupted political system - the only true alternative to the other party: The Concensus."
Toisin sanottuna PS on ainut vaihtoehto korruptiota, NWO-himoja ja muuta paskaa vastaan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703864204576310851503980120.html#articleTabs=article
Vastaukset
Vanhimmat
Ei vielä vastauksia
Aloittaja odottaa vastauksia. Kerro oma näkemyksesi ensimmäisenä.