Direct Democracy Comment

UAE-funded LSE to spy on students - starts anti-direct democracy campaign

In a piece of anti-direct democracy propaganda that is so full-on that it makes itself transparent, the London School of Economics blames what the Swiss have chosen for themselves on the system that enabled them to choose it [which could just as simply have delivered the opposite laws]. It also goes further by attempting to portray Switzerland as a direct democracy, which it is not.

PA Video PA direct democracy video: LSE to spy on ALL private student emails

On behalf of their clients, major advertising agencies create advertisements that are designed to leave a simple, compact and definitive message in the mind of the viewer and, to have that message spinning around after the advert has stopped. This article is an obvious example of how mainstream institutions attempt to implant into the reader's mind, the message that 'public participation is direct democracy and direct democracy is bad'.

Ironically, the Greeks only lost their true democracy when its male-only electorate voted to invade Sparta - which then conquered Athens in self-defence. War was NOT the consequence of using true democracy, but was the consequence of male-only thinking that voted to use violence [without provocation] against others. Through true democracy, these men could have instead voted against war [they alone made the choice - not the system] and which ever system people use, it will always be them creating the laws they implement - not the system.

Propagandists [such as the LSE] who blame true and direct democracy for the negative results of any laws that people create have a hidden agenda and so are being intentionally manipulative. They present both the true democracy system and the separate decisions/laws as one interlocked entity simply because they themselves are not prepared take social responsibility and/or, because they themselves are benefited by the current system of hypocrisy that allows them to continue in their denial.

The ONLY people who would have the legal and ethical right to assess if direct democracy results in 'wrong' or 'right' policies would be the people of that direct democracy.

Direct democracy is simply and only the mechanics that will enable for the people to have true democracy [to have the rule of law] - that's all. No system can be blamed for the policies that people choose to implement with it but, direct democracy is the only system that enables full public participation. This and articles like it are actually criticisms of how other cultures use their free will and the publishers behind them are fully-aware of this but, their pensions are locked into filthy agendas with associated propaganda campaigns that forbid that they be honest in their reporting. To date, the university has received £5.6 M from the Emirates Foundation which is funded by the brutal totalitarian, pro-Sharia UAE government and, the university's secret links to the former Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and his family were only revealed in 2011.

The UAE also executes homosexuals but neither Stephen Fry nor David Cameron have ever had a bad word to say about the LSE's relationship with the UAE government and so, as well as continued funding for the LSE, arms continue to flow from the UK to Kuwait, Bahrain and the rest of the UAE in an effort to suppress a real Arab Spring, where Western-backed governments are refusing to stand-down and bow to the will of the people and, where Western lamestream media agencies show you nothing of the truth of how our freely-elected government is literally directly involved in the killing of the people of these states.

PA direct democracy comment: Stephen Fry's hypocrisy helps Cameron and Obama's anti-Russian propaganda

PA direct democracy media: Western support of dictatorships
PA direct democracy media: Bahrain - what the BBC didn't show you

The university was also criticised for a "chapter of failures" in its links with the Gaddafi regime and a report by former Lord Chief Justice Woolf released in November 2011 said that mistakes and errors of judgement had damaged the LSE's reputation so, with this in mind and with the blatant propaganda of its article taken into consideration, its obvious that direct democracy represents a potential threat to its funding and political support.

Voting for direct democracy outside a general election

Direct Democracy - Audio

It is up to us, the people [not the politicians] to use the power that we have always had, to choose to implement direct democracy as soon as possible.

This is not a protest campaign.

In accordance with Magna Carta Article 61 and with UN UDHR Article 21 and with all democratic principals up-held by the UN [which the UK is signed-up to], the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog is a UN-sanctioned and legally recognised voting format for UK reform to direct democracy - even outside a general election.

Vote legitimately for a peaceful and structured UK reform to direct democracy now simply by following the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog and when numbers reach a point of critical mass, we'll do the rest.

Follow: @self_rule

The People's Administration's constitution for reform to direct democracy and our voting protocols for implementing direct democracy have both been accepted by the UK Electoral Commission and the UN as legitimate. In a general election, the People's Administration DOES NOT have to field candidates to secure your vote on the ballot paper. Outside a general election, you can vote for a legitimate reform to direct democracy now by following @self_rule