| Shared crap is twice as crappy |
| As you can see, the cobblestone which I have circled in the above photograph has been put in the wrong way around - quite unacceptably so, in my view. As I'm sure the inner city is crammed with fusspots such as myself, the municipal politicians' nerve in focusing the attention of all these discerning natives on a miniature administrative body is beyond me. Oh dear, another bump on the head - yup, I've got the message, it was always their intention to gag us. |
|
It's so depressing, this referendum on whether or not the inner city of
Amsterdam should be given its own urban district council. What can you
possibly say without lapsing into gross partiality? That the law is no good,
that the politicians are no good, and that the electorate are no good
either. However, the electorate can only demonstrate that they are
essentially good eggs if the law is any good at all, for in so far as those
who vote in favour and those who vote against are both aware that the quorum
has intentionally been set at such a level as to preclude victory given the
voting patterns we have displayed ever since compulsory attendance was
abolished, this causes commitment to lapse into demo-colic. Majority
torture, is what I would call it.
As the voter and the law cancel one another out, this leaves the no-goodness of the politicians. Who are they? Those who have forced through the electoral threshold, and those who have abused it. I don't think I really want to know exactly who they are. There are too many of them. The lesson I have learned from this most recent referendum? That for the time being I had best vote against everything and anything the Amsterdam Municipal Council comes up with. Whether this will get me anywhere? It may, and then again it may not. Although it won't make the problem go away, I still think it should be possible to reach the sort of level at which we would be able more or less gracefully to resign to not getting what we want. I feel that this is the only proper interpretation of the much maligned word "democracy". For the sake of self-preservation, I now find myself having to feign indifference - a most disheartening thought. I nearly forgot about the fourth issue: that of the actual question - the question which the voters are invited to say yes or no to, that is. Although on this occasion the question had been formulated in crystal-clear terms for a change, this still left the problem as to who should provide the answer. How would the Frisians feel if the population of Limburg were invited to interfere with their bilingual street names? I've yet to examine the papers, but if they don't give me the answer, they're no good either: how many inhabitants of the urban district which has been forced through are opposed to their own district? But let's by all means preserve our impartiality. My show stopper: frosty seat, frosty bum. |