Democratic Process - Hanging by a thread or a rope ?

[Bluedell 5,330]

I have to ask what is more likely to discourage future investment - the potential of some fans boycotting or directors who allowed the £22m proceeds of the last share issue to be spunked away in under 9 month?

[Hildy 0]

Look how the Rangers support got behind David Murray. For years he was the undisputed king of Ibrox and his every utterance was received as though it was written on a tablet of stone.

 

If the Rangers support gets someone running the show that it admires, there is no more compliant group in the country. It reveres the rich man at the top table as though he is an infallible deity. Questions about detail are trampled on and discouraged. The man at the top has the greatest wisdom of all. Leave it to him. He knows best.

 

This situation, thankfully, is gradually changing. Dissent has reared its beautiful head. Meek acceptance is no longer the Rangers support's default position. There is now a realisation, come far, far too late, that the top table may not be where true wisdom lies, indeed, there may be very little there at all.

 

Are we now going to back off from justified dissent? Are we going to retreat from being the conscience of the club? Are we going to return to the old ways of bowing down to whichever master is presented to us?

 

Does this self-imposed regime deserve a season ticket commitment from us? What will it do when the money arrives? Fund Jack Irvine? Overpay undeserving salaried staff? Reward incompetence?

 

Let the dissenters dissent. I believe in them - not the board.

[D'Artagnan 173]

I think there's a misunderstanding of democracy here D'Art. Democracy in my view is about one man one vote and it surely includes freedom of movement, the freedom to remove or refuse labour or material support for something you don't agree with. I'm sure all the 'people' at Blue Pitch Holdings, Laxey and Margarita will be at Ibrox for the rest of the season now, bringing their friends and family along too. They'll buy scarves, jerseys and pies, maybe a programme each and fill the stands.

 

There was nothing 'democratic' about Thursday's vote. Already rich organisations voted in a way they felt would increase their wealth. That's not democracy, far from it. Indeed history tells us that when the masses are ignored, disenfranchised, disempowered and taken for granted they eventually rise up or leave.

 

We didn't see democracy in action on Thursday, we saw naked greed and self-interest, the 'majority' were ignored, the powerful minority won the day.

 

When good men can't tell the difference we really are in trouble.

 

But the democratic system and process is not about your view AMMS - nor mine for that matter. Its the system the requistioners subjected themselves to and is the process which is in place. Its the way it works - and not just for our club, its fairness (or lack thereof) is perhaps a discussion for another time.

 

The fans have the opportunity to effect that process by acquiring the significant shareholding - we should have done it by now but we havent - that to me is not a fault of the process.

[TheTinMan99 0]

Our EGM was about as democratic as Scotland being governed by the Tories. So in a way, I suppose it was the British version of democracy. Just because we have been brain-washed from birth to believe democracy is our saviour, it doesn't make it any less corrupt, or self serving for the elite few.

 

Sometimes democracy is not only wrong, but deeply damaging, especially when it is clearly based on how much money you have. It's no longer a noble concept worth defending at all costs.

[Thinker 870]

Our EGM was about as democratic as Scotland being governed by the Tories. So in a way, I suppose it was the British version of democracy. Just because we have been brain-washed from birth to believe democracy is our saviour, it doesn't make it any less corrupt, or self serving for the elite few.

 

Sometimes democracy is not only wrong, but deeply damaging, especially when it is clearly based on how much money you have. It's no longer a noble concept worth defending at all costs.

 

I see what you're driving at but that's not really a fair analogy. The people down in the South-East who vote the Conservatives in still only have one vote each - equal in power to your's and mine.

 

As others have pointed out in this thread, a weighted share-holders vote isn't true democracy. It's still perfectly legal though, and objecting to it won't get us anywhere.

[TheTinMan99 0]

I see what you're driving at but that's not really a fair analogy. The people down in the South-East who vote the Conservatives in still only have one vote each - equal in power to your's and mine.

 

As others have pointed out in this thread, a weighted share-holders vote isn't true democracy. It's still perfectly legal though, and objecting to it won't get us anywhere.

 

I thought it was a decent analogy, also topical. The tories have no mandate from the people of Scotland to govern, much in the same way as this board have no mandate from the support. How we arrived at that situation, is still a complete failure in the process. In both cases, the peoples votes in effect don't matter.

 

When this happens in so called democracies, the people have only one option left. I have no great hope that our support will organise itself enough to enact any change in the boardroom. We have the weapons to do it, but for most, the emotional attachment prevents them from seeing the bigger picture. The board know this.

[D'Artagnan 173]

I see what you're driving at but that's not really a fair analogy. The people down in the South-East who vote the Conservatives in still only have one vote each - equal in power to your's and mine.

 

As others have pointed out in this thread, a weighted share-holders vote isn't true democracy. It's still perfectly legal though, and objecting to it won't get us anywhere.

 

 

Thats what I was driving at Thinker. Perhaps, for the avoidance of doubt, it would make it easier if we replace the word "democratic" with "due" process.

 

We didn't see democracy in action on Thursday, we saw naked greed and self-interest, the 'majority' were ignored, the powerful minority won the day.

 

But lets say the requisitioners had won - with their promises of institutional investors. Would have that still have been a victory for naked greed and self-interest ?

 

Are the protests against the system because it is unfair or because it failed to deliver the correct result with regard to who we wanted to win ?

[the gunslinger 3,366]

should the french have just accepted german rule in 1940 or the falklanders Argentinian rule just because they won. should we accept the bedroom tax or privatization of the post office just because the tories won.

 

thats not how democracy works.

[forlanssister 3,050]

When almost one third of the shareholders get 70 votes for every 70p "invested" and the vast majority get one vote for every 70p it kinds of puts a different slant on democracy.

[D'Artagnan 173]

When almost one third of the shareholders get 70 votes for every 70p "invested" and the vast majority get one vote for every 70p it kinds of puts a different slant on democracy.

 

That is a fair point FS - but you know as well as I do thats the price of capitalism. Lets call it it due process and take democracy equation out of it.