19 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 26 '21 at 17:04 answer Flydog57 timeline score: 0
Feb 26 '21 at 11:37 comment added Polygnome @pjc50 "and power is unnecessarily centralized on the Prime Minister" You mean, unlike the US president?
Feb 26 '21 at 11:27 answer Gordon Wrigley timeline score: 1
Feb 25 '21 at 17:11 comment added Alnitak @pjc50 the House of Lords has limited power, mostly limited to review of Bills submitted by Parliament. They can technically reject bills outright, but it almost never happens. I rather like that many of those that do serve in the HoL do so purely out of a sense of duty, rather than because they sought the role.
Feb 25 '21 at 0:07 answer shaunokane001 timeline score: 2
Feb 24 '21 at 16:46 comment added Caleth @RBarryYoung "X is a component of a modern democracy" means that at least one modern democracy has X, not that X is required in a modern democracy. You might be thinking of "X is a component of modern democracy"
Feb 24 '21 at 15:54 comment added WaterMolecule @Caleth On the other hand, US Supreme Court Justices are appointed and approved by (somewhat) democratically elected officials. In recent years, the ability to appoint and approve Supreme Court Justices has become an important issue in US electoral politics, with some candidates even pitching lists of potential nominees to voters. At least some members of the House of Lords have not been appointed by elected officials, so I think the comparison is a bit of an overstatement.
Feb 24 '21 at 15:20 history edited Jontia CC BY-SA 4.0
Change title to match the question body.
Feb 24 '21 at 14:08 comment added Jontia @RBarryYoung there is clearly a semantics problem in the comments here with the silent use of the words necessary, ideal or good in front of the word component.
Feb 24 '21 at 12:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1364545646842241027
Feb 24 '21 at 11:08 comment added pjc50 @Jontia the UK is not an especially modern country, it is full of unmodernized feudal relics; it is democratic, but not especially so, with a number of structural biases; and power is unnecessarily centralized on the Prime Minister.
Feb 23 '21 at 20:51 history became hot network question
Feb 23 '21 at 19:38 answer ohwilleke timeline score: 70
Feb 23 '21 at 15:39 answer o.m. timeline score: 18
Feb 23 '21 at 13:35 comment added Jontia @Alexei the UK is a modern country and a functioning democracy. The house of Lords is a component of the UK's system. So the HoL is a component of a modern democracy. Whether is should be, if for example you were creating a new democracy from scratch without the UK's 800+ years of historical momentum is (as I read it) the core of this question.
Feb 23 '21 at 13:18 comment added Jontia There's no need to delete it, labels such as "constitutional monarchy" and "parliamentary democracy" or "constitutional republic" are technical labels that can be used to make points, but that doesn't change the idea that there are generic modern democratic ideals about accountability and conduct that can and should be applied generally despite technical labels.
Feb 23 '21 at 13:13 comment added raghu My understanding was wrong. U.K is a constitutional monarchy. House of Lords seems so undemocratic that this question was posted. I Will delete the question if it does not make sense.
Feb 23 '21 at 13:01 comment added Alexei Can you provide a reference for the "House of Lords considered a component of modern democracy"? I am not very familiar with the UK politics, but it seems more complex than a simple "modern democracy": a constitutional monarchy + parliamentary democracy.
Feb 23 '21 at 12:51 history asked raghu CC BY-SA 4.0