Unions, parties, etc resist such tactics by a adopting ‘wedding cake democracy’ that is members appoint delegates who in turn appoint the governing body, thus effectively neutralising maverick voting. Labour is giving ordinary members (as distinct from union affiliates) direct votes in the leadership selection, which is vulnerable to interference unless robust ‘primaries’ systems as in USA are in place.'
*emphasis mine
This is interesting. National Party supporters, trying to pervert democracy.
Who'd have thought?
4 comments:
I am unaware that there is any law or even convention that you can't belong to more than one party
After all the Labour party give two votes to all Affiliated Union members who are also party members
the national party is far more vulnerable to having its branches taken over by infiltrators = most Nat branches that i have seen are so poorly populated that they are ripe for the picking - just a few enthusaistic anarchists beocming members in each branch and the party would be taken over form the inside - I did advocate down your way a while back RG that the greens should also become national party members - then they would much more impact on politics than joining the Greens or Labour. I reckon Bill would love t have a few more memebrs in the Nats in Southland - particularly some under 70 - that would be really refreshing for him and the party
Will I be able to vote for the Nat party leader if I take out a membership, DH?
Guess not. Democracy sticks in the Tory craw like...a stick.
Post a Comment