Polls Archive

The decisions we make determine our lives. The point is to find how we can make the best decisions we can.

And the best decisions are the ones that are accepted by majority. That means by voting, with democracy and not by monarchy or oligarchy or tyranny, regimes that were tried and did not prevail.

But since it is not possible for everyone to vote for everything, we vote once every 4 years and we choose "theoretically" the best among us, so that they can implement a specific program and make these decisions, through a smaller model of proportional voting and again through the majority.

But these presuppose the existence of consciousness and the freedom of its expression.

However, at the level of elected leaders while voting in the parliament, the voice of conscience does not exist or rather is not heard. What is heard is the position of the party president, who determines the line of the party and under the excuse of party discipline and unity, along with the threat of deletion or other consequences, everyone agrees. Sometimes the parliament members are not even informed what they are voting for, an assurance from the competent minister is enough to convince them to vote.

Unfortunately, the political parties that are not an integral part of the functioning of Democracy do not function democratically! Democracy could function without parties, simply by electing the best individual representatives.

Just because someone belongs to a party does not mean that they have to agree with the party on everything and that when they disagree they should be treated as a foreign body or as a deserter.

Nowadays, the image of the infallible party has been created and politicians have confused "making the right decision" with "being able to vote for what we want" apparently under the illusion that they are infallible.

But is anyone infallible? Does anyone claim perfection? Mistakes are for humans and they are the actions that the smart ones do not do again but the idiots repeat.

The parties claim that if the first party does not have the autonomy needed to vote for what it wants and if it cannot pass a bill (a law draft), then there is a risk that the government will fall.

So under the pretext of not leading to anarchy and chaos, the law of enhanced proportional representation is applied, to favor the first party with more MPs so that it can carry out its work undisturbed. This is where non-elected MPs are appointed while the elected are rejected.

But how can a government lose a majority in parliament? Proportionality doesn’t change!

That is like, if in a family a father proposes something that the rest of the family does not want and in the end this is not done, then the father should disappear!?

If a government is not autonomous and proposes a proper bill that has been approved by the people it will not be voted on? Who will not vote for what the people have chosen? And citizens cannot judge? There will be no elections again?

But if it is autonomous and proposes a wrong bill, what will happen?

Unfortunately, the simple analogy, that is the true choices of the citizens in conjunction with the vote of conscience are not considered as a solution, because it is supposed to be like governing by an elected minority, which will determine by completing the required number of votes to pass (approve) the bills.

Here we are constantly discussing party power, party prestige, party collaborations and we continue to believe that everyone agrees with everything and there is no talk of differentiation and the conscience of the elected MPs.

To the mind of a man who in his life has not found any other man who agrees with him on everything, this sounds scary. Even with dear friends and relatives there is always the opposite view.

This totality of the parties' disciplinary agreement on all issues is terrifying because it brings to mind other periods in history where the opposite view was feared and could even lead to death. Some call today's Republic… Elected Monarchy.

At best this system that has been imposed on our lives, the impersonal political parties (political companies) looks like party oligarchy.

But one could say that nothing different can be done from what is already being done! Suppose then, that the enhanced proportional system has its advantages in the occasion that a leading party has a clear lead and stands out from the other candidates in order not to be blackmailed by a minority.

But what happens when even with this premium electoral system a party cannot form an autonomous government?

Again, the leader of the first party is called upon to work with one or more party leaders to form a government! Again, however, the election is not proportional and based on voting, but based on the desire, the will, the judgment and the interests of one, instead of two, instead of three people parties.

Why, at least in this case, should not depend on the real desire of the electorate, since in this case, it seems that the people do not distinguish one extremely suitable for the leadership of the country in relation to the rest!

So why is he called upon to form a government with some other minority parties, who are probably just thirsty for power, as long as they outnumber the rival party and just make it useless?

After the appointment of MPs we also have the appointment of government parties. How is it that in this case the parties cooperate, while when they are not under the pressure of their small percentage they cannot let their members cooperate to achieve the best possible result?

And yet this has happened many times in the past when no party has achieved autonomy and when there has been a need to achieve a serious goal.

Then solidarity appears, Ecumenical governments are formed, governments of cooperation and wide acceptance in which all the party political formations of the country participate.

But the selfish gene of the parties wants everything to be its own. Only when they risk getting nothing, they manage to cooperate.

It would be great if we lived in a perfect world and in all future electoral contests there would be suitable personalities and political figures for all the citizens of the world to inspire confidence, to deserve their vote and to gain the autonomy they so desire.

But perfection does not exist and if it exists it is only in what we mean, when we say in different languages God, Θεός, Dieu, Allah …

Parties urgently need to understand that they must accept democracy within themselves, respect for diversity, the conscience and belief of the people, abandon the arrogant behavior of the infallible, seek the best solution and cooperate with each other.

White-Blank votes will count when the number of people who uses them will be newsworthy and could not be ignored.

People do not have a voice to speak and the only case they are trying to be heard is through elections. Then they try to send some messages and on that day voters must be given the opportunity, at least once every four years, to say what they really want.

Unfortunately even then, the words we have learned to use are too few and they do not make good sense. Green, Blue or Red party is a very small vocabulary.

Don’t we have to consider that we have grown up, that we have matured and that we have to learn other words too, so that we can express what we really want?

When none of the parties and their leading figures, inspire confidence in the voter that they are ready and able to take over the government of his country, then what should he vote for?

Shouldn’t the voters have this option and the people the opportunity to express their concern or dissatisfaction, even if they never want to use it? But if they do shouldn’t we know what would happen?

WHITE and BLANK must become ONE UNIVERSAL WORD easy to understand meaning.

On election days or rather nights, there are no losers, there are not even winners, there is only the verdict of the people and we must respectfully try to listen to it, decode it and interpret its will and possible fears.

In order to make this happen, the meaning and the importance of the White vote for the citizens and politicians should be clarified and all the people should know and agree that the White Ballot clearly means only one thing, and that’s it "I do not want any of the candidate parties to rule alone" and also to find out what could happen if a large percentage of voters voted White!

For example, if there is no autonomy of the first party and White gets a lot of votes (more than the party that would ally with the first to form a coalition government) or even for the extreme scenario that the White vote would get more than the first party! (Even then they would be counted together with the invalid ones?)

At least in these cases, politicians and citizens should agree that all parties should govern together, forming a government of national unity based on simple proportional representation, in order to look for possible mistakes, better positions and to work together to improve the system.

Only in this way the White Vote will finally be able to play the role for which it was established and the work for which it was intended.

The supreme judges should be elected by the strengthened majority of Parliament and not appointed by the respective government and the respective prime minister or president or governor.

Judicial evaluation processes should be improved so that the best are elected to sit in the highest courts and exercise the sacred function of this power.

I believe that Justice should be strengthened immediately and to the fullest. Financially, in human resources in infrastructure, in advanced electronic recording processes and in everything else it needs, in order to reach the level it deserves, as one of the main powers and forces of humanity. It is unacceptable that in trade and economic transactions the procedures run the fast track, while the procedures for the administration of justice remain stationary.

Protection must also be ensured from the interference of powerful political and economic actors, who may seek to influence court decisions for their own benefit, sometimes wanting to advance the outcome of the trial aiming at a desired outcome and at other times by creating obstacles.

Unfortunately, the field of justice is full of windows, wide open, half open or slightly open, from where powerful law firms find the power to intervene in the operation way, using every possible means, legitimate or unfair, to ensure the victory of their client. Sometimes they find a way to intervene in the selection of jurors, sometimes even in the selection of the judge, while some would not hesitate to use professional false witnesses.

Unfortunately many times the outcome of a certain trial can be different, depending on which judge is sitting in the courtroom. That means, each judge can adjudicate a case in a personal way, as if the Divine Trial could have many different views.

Unfortunately the mechanisms of justice cannot control possible well-funded (professional) witnesses, since there are no electronic systems to cross-check their reliability and solvency.

Unfortunately, many witnesses are afraid to testify in court, because the witness protection process has not yet evolved and automated and the result is that many prosecution witnesses of criminal organizations or powerful illegals are found dead one after the other, when they do not simply give in to blackmail.

Unfortunately, many honest Judges are blackmailed and feared for their lives, and while they should be the most protected people on the planet, there are not a few who have been sacrificed in the performance of their duties.

Finally, I believe that justice must have a say in serious social issues, through its elected representatives.

At this point Cosmovote wishes to pay tribute, honor and glory to the unbreakable and incorruptible judges who come first to our minds and all the others who passed from this world, giving hope to all the rest of us, that there can be justice on Earth. In their memory we pray so that they are forever, eternal and bright examples for the next ones.

Anastasios_Polyzoidis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasios_Polyzoidis

Georgios_Tertsetis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgios_Tertsetis

Giovanni_Falcone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Falcone

Paolo_Borsellino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Borsellino

The Statue of Liberty, this World Heritage Monument placed at the entrance of New York Harbor and officially unveiled in October 1886 to a standing ovation of the public for 15 minutes, welcomed more than 12 million immigrants (the European ancestors of Americans) holding in her upraised right hand a torch to enlighten the world and in her left a plaque inscribed with the date "July 4, 1776", (USA Independence Day).

The giant steel statue (its height without the base is 46.5 meters, while with the base 93) which is a gift from France to the United States, shows us what great things can be created with friendship and cooperation of the nations. It was created with money collected from small donations, from all the French and European immigrants who felt and became Americans. There must not have been a person of the time, who did not give even a few cents to build the Statue of Liberty, since the rich were not so willing to finance its construction.

It was especially encouraging for people all over the world to know that Freedom exists and is not just a dream, but a common human desire, since there was no people who had not fought for their freedom, while at the same time the struggle of the enslaved Greeks continued for liberation from the Ottomans with the slogan "Freedom or Death".

In a free society, however, something more is needed, for people to live in peace and to be able to look ahead and progress, and this first sign of civilization is...

In a free society, however, something more is needed, for people to live in peace and to be able to look ahead and progress, and this necessary condition is Justice.

So if we wished to create a second statue, equal to that of Liberty, this would have to be the statue of Justice, and a suitable place for it would be on the divided and long-suffering great island of Cyprus, which is near and between Europe, Asia and Africa!

A woman too, with a piece of cloth tied in front of her eyes so that she does not see and her judgment is influenced by looks or appearance or by any likes and dislikes, ready to weigh with the scale she holds (the same scale which all humans are gifted and carry within us to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil) the actions of men and to render the rewards and punishments due to each one, having in her other hand a naked sword, not to slaughter anyone but so that no one dares to question her.

So seeing the statue of Justice, we and our descendants will have the opportunity to remember and not forget the real values in human life, the ones we should strive for, the ones we should achieve in our lives in order to rise and improve, the ones we must follow to be able to live better and not lose our way following other temporary and insignificant goods, repeating mistakes of the past.

Socrates, the first philosopher, was sentenced to death by a "rigged" trial and a falsified court decision. Leaving he said to the Athenians "Now it is time to leave, I to die and you to live. Which of us goes to a better place, no one knows but God." He had a clear conscience, the others?

Although his disciples begged him to escape, he preferred to drink the poison and die in prison, rather than break the laws of his country, sacrificing himself to show the true meaning and value of Justice, in relation to the rendering of Justice by human courts. Such is the value of Justice that a just death is better than an unjust life!

About 2.400 years had to pass and in 2012 the trial of Socrates was repeated in modern Athens, by well-known lawyers and judges, using the laws of that time, and he was finally acquitted, justified!

It is the duty of men to bring the administration of justice by human courts (the laws and their application) to the measure of humans's sense of justice.

Even in the event that someone is finally acquitted by a court of law, an apology can and must be made, all the necessary clarifications must be given and all the necessary actions must be taken to restore the person's reputation.

We are human and we make mistakes, the point is to be able to correct them and not repeat them, but also learn to forgive those who deserve our forgiveness.

But the bad thing is not limited to just two people. It's not just that one mathematician won't be a school teacher and doesn't have the job he deserves, while at the same time someone else has this job and he doesn't deserve it or doesn't value or just doesn’t fit for that job, for the simple reason that a math teacher should know not only math, but he should also have pedagogical (children’s) skills and love.

Unfortunately, not just two people are affected by this, but the whole world. All the children of the world instead of being taught valuable knowledge and instead of being exemplified by valuable people, they will learn bad lessons about Life, that there is no meritocracy, there are no people who love what they do, there is no appetite for work and it is not worth striving for the best.

Many citizens will leave dissatisfied with their service in ministries, many people will leave hospitals and courts disappointed and many injustices will follow.

When in an emergency-unpredictable situation you cannot convince of the necessity and just of measures and decisions, so that they are consciously accepted, you must impose them with fear and punishment. But the unjust measures or those that do not convince the people, bring denial, anger, outburst, uprising.

At least when there is public opinion, this is an indication of fairness and a consolation that comes from respecting the opinion of many. Otherwise it seems like arbitrariness, like a latent democracy.

A person's beliefs are not a joke, they are the person himself. Only when convinced, someone is obedient and cooperates. Anyone can respect fair laws, but not the opinion of governments that think they are expressing the public opinion.

The procedures should be modernized and done electronically, like direct-urgent referendums, to cost less, to have ease, transparency and to ensure the integrity of the process. As it happens with paying taxes and online shopping, so that it is done quickly, there is cross-check of data and fraud is prevented, so the investigation of the desire of the people could be ensured!

Democracy must become an evolving and self-improving system, otherwise it will end up like a museum, like Acropolis and Parthenon that you can only imagine the glory and the beauty they once had. Even the issue of elections, those with paper ballots must end and be modernized. Let us not forget that in ancient Athens the secret ballots were done with shells (fragments of pottery) but fortunately things evolved and we reached the electronic age.