有很多人用台灣的陳水扁及美國的布殊，這兩個不稱職的總統來否定民主選舉這個普世價值。台灣及美國總統選舉明明是很公平的一人一票，為何會選出這兩位不能幹的總統呢？把國家的經濟推去更差的境況。這是否民主制度出錯了呢？筆者可以大聲堅定地講：這種說法是100%的謬誤！
未講解為何是謬誤前，先舉一舉例子。假如一名老闆需要請人，是否100%經他 interview 及接納的應徵者都是稱職的員工呢？如果是，又為何每年都會有很多不稱職的員工被炒魷呢？在談戀愛方面，是否所有人第一次拍拖就可以無風無浪直到結婚生仔呢？就算雙方結了婚，世上仍然有很多離婚的活生生例子。
靚仔可能比較容易找到女友，但不能代表他是一個好丈夫。同一道理，有魅力，好口才及有急智的參選人可能在民主選舉中勝出的機會會比較高，但以上三個優點是不能代表他是一名能幹的好領袖。人並不是神，由人決定的事往往會有出錯的機會，就算用民主這個制度選出來的領導人，也不能擔保他/她是好領袖。民主制度的好處是用最平宜成本，把不稱職的領袖踢落台。民進黨在領導台灣期間，多年來劣績斑斑，並且多次在選舉中欺騙選民，最後它所種下的惡果在昨日台灣的立委選舉中發芽了，人民用最文明的方法一人一票把民進黨轟下台。在無內戰，無鬥爭之下，台灣不需要付出罕貴的代價便能和平地把政權改變。
2008年1月13日星期日
選錯人
訂閱：
發佈留言 (Atom)
14 則留言:
又是我這個不懂政治的閒人來搭訕了.
記得當年96定97選特首,我只記得有3個人,一個是董生,一位是吳光正,另一位我忘了.當大部份人都投董生一票時.
當時D市民都好欣喜接受呢位政壇陌生人做特首,又讚佢個名好,建華建華.讚佢識上海話,廣東話,普通話,仲有英文. 大家都十分滿意這位特首.
可能當時樓市,股市暢旺,基本上事但搵個人做特首都冇人在乎呢.
跟住股災,樓市大跌,經濟低迷,於是大家就賴董生腳頭唔好,之後佢搞D咩政制就必彈冇讚.
成為了香港首位眾人的出氣袋.
我覺得選一個不認識, 未做過既人係十分冒險的事,就以樣貎,政綱作參考.
今日我看志雲飯局,訪問葉太,看完之後, 我覺得她這個人雖然笑容不親切,樣子像很惡,但是她是會說真話的人,實話實說.很感受到她的說話是真正發自內心的.
可是因為政治明星化, 所以她輸了.不過我相信她有這麼的理想和在美國讀書學到的知識,一定可以應用於香港.
P.S. D人成日話佢講野好似咀秒秒, 其實留心看, 佢講野可以清晰而不露齒. 好野.
大吉利是講句, 如果英九俾人淋x水, 冇左靚仔樣, 咁d師奶仲支唔支持佢呢?
當年第一屆就是那三個人
關於葉劉淑儀, 我還是要認同林忌所言, 他發自內心是國家社會主義份子, 騙子, 他輸正正代表香港選舉並沒有明星化, 眼睛是雪亮的, 還是會聽其言觀其行. 他上台只代表香港踏入黑暗時代.
再補充, 民主選舉所動用的金錢十分之多, 而且是沒有促進生產力的消耗, 不過起碼不需要流血, 影響政府軍隊日常運作等.
賭徒:
你連我撈飯啲汁都攞埋噃,老友~~~~~~:P
P.S.你都自修好多科噃:)
Daniel.
To 品姐，
還有兩個，他們是大法官楊鐵樑，及商人李福善
葉劉點會無料，佢能夠上位保安局局長，當然有一技之長。但從她在廿三條事件上，知佢是一個不知民意，只顧聽阿爺話的應聲狗一名。
To kenka
十分認同，和內戰相比，選舉的錢算什麼。
To Daniel
有網民曾對我的評語是「騎呢」，actually，我接受這種評語的。像我依種行 offtrace 的人，被人說是「騎呢」何足奇呢？
十分同意kenka的意思,
每次選舉所花的人力物力財力實在太多,太浪費了.
我認為凡參選的或將來中選的一日開始,必需24小時穿上超薄避彈衣,和自備銀針試毒,最好學埋詠春和跆拳道.以備不時自我保護和攻擊.
另外可以向電影製作人員購買血包,必要時自我引爆,扮中彈搏同情.
(以上純粹搞笑)
賭徙,
我諗葉太讀完番書番黎進步左了.
賭徒,
美國總統選舉不是一人一票啊~
布殊係低票當選的
另外, 你對葉太的批評我不太認同, 佢比人鬧到咁, 佢點會唔知民意？但社會上每個人都有佢既崗位, 佢身在其位, 佢既責任就係替政府去推銷廿三條, 正如一個化妝品sales受老細所指, 要去推一啲佢自己都唔鍾意既化妝品, 你又會唔會話佢地係應聲狗？
小光，
美國唔係一人一票，難道是一人兩票嗎？
他使用選舉人票是因為選舉法在二百年前建立的，當時科技無咁發達，點票上有困難，就用選舉人票這個行政方法，盡量反映美國選民的意願。二百年後的今日仍然用這個笨拙的選舉人票制度是因為美國修改憲法的門檻太高，要每個洲過2/3國會議員讚成才可以修改，事旦一個洲唔夠票就 fail，所以遲遲都無總統肯費大量人力物力去修改選舉法。
sales 代表公司的利益，佢點做與我無關。但政府是代表香港市民的民意，不是代表阿爺的意願，佢不顧民意，就與我有關
賭徒兄:
你似PA人多啲噃,講果啲嘢同我讀嘅一模一樣
Daniel.
Ever thought about another method of selecting the most suitable candidate for the job?
I currently do not have the solution, but if the democratic system is causing the presidents to be good at charming people who are not necessary good for the job. Then the whole selection system has a problem. Yes, if a boss only looks at the grades when selecting the candidate, causing unqualified workers to be hired. It is not the workers' fault, but rather the selection system's fault (apply that concept to marriage and relationship as well).
I am not saying we should go back to dictatorship, but instead we should be thinking of a new system. The world had gone from Anarchy to Monarchy, Republic from the Roman time, and now we have Political communism and Democracy. Maybe time for something new?
Also, in USA, it IS NOT 1 vote per person to vote for the president. Please check the record, Al Gore got more votes than George W. Bush, but he still lost the election. Please read about the system of Electoral Votes. I think that was what 小光 refer to.
Desertfox
ho_kwan
中國因走 another method 咪造成血流成河囉，世上無完美的制度，經歷幾百年的印證，民主雖然不是完美制度，但比其他的制度好而已。
我講美國選舉是很公平的一人一票，不是絕對公平的一人一票。有錯嗎？戈爾係選票上贏布殊，但因選舉人票輸了選舉。這情況在美國歷史上，出現過兩三次，也是我說美國的選舉人票制度笨拙的原因。但不能因這兩三次的差異，就話美國選舉不是一人一票。你當其餘九成幾選舉人票制度能造出一人一票的效果是不存在嗎？
Thanks for your reply, I didn't thought a comment on an old post would get your attention.
In my personal opinion I think the Chinese system fails with corruption and the fact that the communist party lies outside of the law (Of course the party members got their own "rules" to follow, but in general corruption crippled it). It may sound crazy, but imagine if (although a big if) a wise person in charge of China, working with the country and sees a person who works under him as a good successor and prepare him well for the job and hands him the power in the right time. Although the selection would then be based on one biased opinion and corruption cannot take place in the process, but I still think it would be better than having millions of ignorant citizen who knows nothing about the big picture rather than their own ricebowl. Why did Bush family come into power? They purposely befriend with the riches and get a lot of funding from them. Once they got into power, lowering the tax to benefit them. It's not bad enough to spill blood all over because corruption in the local government is not as crazy as China, but corruption at the tip is actually comparable to China if not worse. I am willing to wait 50 years for the Chinese leadership to cleanup the corruption in order to create a better system, maybe even better than the US democracy.
As for the one person one vote system. Sorry that I didn't know you are aware of the electoral vote system. It was created to protect the interest of the smaller states. Like you said, there had been a couple of times in the past where a candidate won with just electoral vote and without the majority vote. I believe it will happen again in the future. However I wouldn't call it a fair one person one vote system until they change it to a true majority vote wins system.
If you ask me between the Chinese and the US government, which one is running better, I would say the US government is running better because they got more experience (230+ years of experience) and a less corrupted environment, but if you ask me today which election system is more suitable for China or HK. I honestly would say the Chinese system is better.
Thank you for your time.
Desertfox
發佈留言