7 ms·
A couple of years before we had an election about what side to drive on. The right side actually lost the election. The politicians promptly (and legally) ignor
by yxhuvud 7y ago
A couple of years before we had an election about what side to drive on. The right side actually lost the election. The politicians promptly (and legally) ignored it and went ahead anyhow. And that is a good thing.
- kaffeemitsahne 7y agoWhy have an election if there is no intention to respect the outcome?
- DaiPlusPlus 7y agoSo you don't end up with a Brexit situation on your hands.
- mavhc 7y agoAlso a referendum that wasn't legally binding, oh well, we banned guns so had to find another way to shoot ourselves in the foot
- alkonaut 7y agoSome referendums (most?) are advisory rather than directly legally binding. The intention of the lawmaker in situations like these could be e.g “there is a huge economic gain from driving on the same side as Norway, Sweden and Denmark, but if there is a massive opposition perhaps we can’t do it.” People are also prone to prefer the status quo , something which should perhaps be accounted for in decisions that will affect people many generations into the future.
- Wildgoose 7y agoDenmark also drove on the Left. They switched at the same time. I was there two weeks before it happened, but I was only 15 months old at the time.
- frostwhale 7y agoAll of the issues people that Direct Democracy has, or people perceive it to have. And presumably, since he said legally, there are rules they have to follow to not agree with the election. That being said, like you I am curious for more details! It does seem a little strange on the face of it.
- denzil_correa 7y agoThe outcome of an election is representation in parliament - which was clearly respected. Elections aren't a popularity vote.
- thunderbong 7y agoThat's a seriously fantastic point. I think most voters in democratic systems conflate the two and miss this in it's entirety.
- BurningFrog 7y agoYeah, Sweden has referendums, and we do one every 1-3 decades, but they're only "advisory". Power rests 100% with parliament. You ask "why?". It's a good question. The system is hard to defend logically, but it is respected nonetheless.
- umanwizard 7y agoLook at the years-long Brexit saga for a good reason.
- bayesian_horse 7y agoIt's naive to assume referendums are inherently more democratic. The Brexit situation is one good example why. They posed the wrong question and arrived at an answer the majority of both the voters and the parliament are already deeply unhappy with... If I wanted to grab power and rule as a dictator, I would hold referendums every month. You just wouldn't like the questions or the rules...
- yxhuvud 7y agoStrictly speaking though, UK also only have advisory referendums. If parliament wanted to they could just ignore Brexit. Politically impossible even if legal, though.
- bayesian_horse 7y agoThe British parliament seems to be ignoring Brexit just fine, it's just that only the prime minister can stop it.
- BurningFrog 7y ago> It's naive to assume referendums are inherently more democratic. I think they're more democratic, pretty much by definition. The point you're making is that they're not good.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
- astura 7y agoLooks like Sweden has never held a binding referendum. [1] Firstly, the goal of a non-binding referendum is to gather public opinion. Secondly, the outcome of the referendum was respected for 13 years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_Sweden# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_Sweden#
- jonke 7y agoMy understanding of this from older relatives was that question divided within the parties of the Parlament. This is usually solved in Sweden by postpone until every party sorts out there own standing. However, if that isn’t successful we have a advisory referendum that commits to nothing but will break some party deadlocks.
- denzil_correa 7y ago> And that is a good thing. Curious - why is Left Hand Traffic better than Right Hand Traffic?
- happytoexplain 7y agoI believe the parent post is saying that right-hand is better, but I'm curious on the question in either direction.
- bjourne 7y agoI assume you mean worse. Driving on the left was worse because the steering wheel was also on the left, reducing visibility. For some reason Swedish car manufacturers in the 60s, which was a big industry, didn't produce cars with the steering wheel on the right.
- seanos 7y agoIt's not intrinsically better, it's just a convention, but it helps if everyone operates to the same standard for obvious reasons. Since neighbouring countries drove on the right, it was better to adopt the same standard. This was not an issue for islands such as the UK and Japan with no direct road links to neighbours, therefore they still drive on the left. Originally, before cars, the nobility rode their horses on the left to defend against oncoming traffic since they held their swords in their right hand. For that reason, peasants travelled on the right for safety. After the French Revolution it was prudent for the nobility to blend in, hence all traffic began to travel on the right which was then spread by the French empire.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- yxhuvud 7y agoSide doesn't matter in itself, but all our neighbours drove on the right side, which in itself is a good enough reason to switch.
- Taniwha 7y ago
- sngz 7y agowhy is it a good thing? driving on the left is better
- XorNot 7y agoUtterly marginally, and 80% of the world drives on the right now. Driving on the left is going to lose eventually.
- Taniwha 7y agoI'm pretty sure that the last country to change what side of the road it drives on decided to switch to driving on the left ....
- Wildgoose 7y agoNo, because India drives on the Left. That's a sixth of the world's population just in that country alone. Then Japan, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, etc.
- sngz 7y agojust cause more people do it doesn't mean its better. My original question was trying to understand the reasoning behind the claim that right side is better.