[Closed] Cameron as PM

But this is politics after all and in the current situation it takes precedence over the economy.

The collection of arseholes (and I'm sure they are mostly arseholes, being that going through the Student Union Exec seems to be a prerequisite for any career in politics) are our servants.

They have no place trying to deliberately scupper things in the hope that they can have their jobs back in a few years.

KC is indeed very pro europe, but I think he's old enough now to know when to keep his mouth shut.

Hell, it's rather more qualification than any chancellor I can remember.

You've not seen Gideon Osborne yet, he's loaded with talent & experience
or so [I once met a black man] Dave says anyway

How much of the debt is from the bank bail out, how much from smaller tax revenues and how much is from the war?

Is anyone remotely concerned about the fact that Cameron will (presumably) head a government that now has the various Terrorism Acts in place? Essentially, he has carte blanche to tap people's phones, lock someone up without trial for 28 days, try them with no jury, court evidence is just an optional extra, and all for looking like they might have once thought about not agreeing with the government. That's how those pieces of legislation work as far as I can see, anyway.

Anyone bothered that a right-wing government now has those terrifying powers?

Anyone bothered that a right-wing government now has those terrifying powers?

didn't the exiting right wing government have those powers too?

Anyone bothered that a right-wing government now has those terrifying powers?

I was more bothered when a left wing government had them. Most of the world's major internal surveillance systems have been the product of left wing systems - the Stasi, the NKVD etc. The left wing is inherently more interested in controlling and monitoring citizens in my book.

Given that both the Liberals and the Conservatives have strong civil liberties elements within their parties (remember David Davis resigning?), I hope we'll see the legislation toned down.

The collection of arseholes (and I'm sure they are mostly arseholes, being that going through the Student Union Exec seems to be a prerequisite for any career in politics) are our servants.

There are career politicians in all the main parties.

They have no place trying to deliberately scupper things in the hope that they can have their jobs back in a few years.

Erm, that's how politics works. Anything else you'd like me to point out?

I was more bothered when a left wing government had them. Most of the world's major internal surveillance systems have been the product of left wing systems - the Stasi, the NKVD etc. The left wing is inherently more interested in controlling and monitoring citizens in my book.

Well I'm sure all the people in those banana republics slept soundly at night.

Of course, Chile, Argentina, White ruled South Africa etc never had state organisations watching & controlling their citizenry did they?

Only left-wing Govts do that.. 🙄

Is anyone remotely concerned about the fact that Cameron will (presumably) head a government that now has the various Terrorism Acts in place? Essentially, he has carte blanche to tap people's phones, lock someone up without trial for 28 days, try them with no jury, court evidence is just an optional extra, and all for looking like they might have once thought about not agreeing with the government. That's how those pieces of legislation work as far as I can see, anyway.

Anyone bothered that a right-wing government now has those terrifying powers?

That's hilarious. Well done.
[img] [/img]

Anyone bothered that a right-wing government now has those terrifying powers?

didn't the exiting right wing government have those powers too?

+1.

There are career politicians in all the main parties.

Not something I dispute. They're all arseholes in the main.

Erm, that's how politics works. Anything else you'd like me to point out?

It may well be how politics works at present, but it's not how it [b]should [/b]work. We elect these people to represent our interests, not their own. If we allow a small clique to govern for their benefit, and sit around going "Oh, that's politics, didn't you know? How gauche!" then we'll end up in the shit pretty damned quickly.

cameron is not a direct threat as such

hes seems rather vacuous and devoid of original ideas himself, its his paymasters and pupeteers, ashcroft, wheeler, murdoch etc id be worried about

i suppose if the torys really do balls things up again and we end up with poll-tax esque riots then maybe those powers could be dangerous

this morning, the sun rose in the sky, i woke up, put the kettle on, and made a cup of coffee.

Then i drove to work, all the traffic lights worked, i saw a bin-lorry and some dudes hard at work filling it.

as far as i can tell, life continues pretty much as it was before the election.

as far as i can tell, politicians only ever make things worse, how about we just do without them? we let them get on with their talks and their squabbles, and we quietly get on with our lives?

Just dred its not a return to the 80's
high even higher week to week intrest rates
and plenty of reduncies
God knows how the Tories are going to cut the
spending in the NHS has they already privatised
most of the manual workforce in the 80's
Created PFI to give new buildings and wards
Only to find the NHS cant open them being the
Contracted costs to maintain and runing them.

After just bailing out the Banks cock up we are
now going to face the true reccession thats coming up!

didn't the exiting right wing government have those powers too? - Good point!

Granted the ex-USSR had a very strong line in repression, but I really can't see that right-wingers connect in any way either with civil liberties; eg Maggie and the miners/Irish/anyone who disagreed with her/support for the charming Mr Pinochet; George Bush and Guantanamo; Germany 1933-45 etc etc. I did rather assume that David Davis' resignation was some sort of barking publicity stunt that mis-fired; I don't see the Terrorism laws being relaxed any time soon!

Leaving aside economic prefernces, views on teaching, healthcare and all those things that are very important, for me the biggest reason I could never vote for the right is their (to me) repressive tendencies.

It may well be how politics works at present, but it's not how it should work. We elect these people to represent our interests, not their own. If we allow a small clique to govern for their benefit, and sit around going "Oh, that's politics, didn't you know? How gauche!" then we'll end up in the shit pretty damned quickly.

I like you. You have a wonderfully romantic view of the world.

Germany 1933-45 etc etc.

National socialists. A bit different to the Communist variety and not very left wing.

Come on, even some of you ardent Tories must have cringed when you saw Osborne, Letwin and Gove trying to be all statesmanlike with the Lib Dems?

So do you think we should be communists?

I like you. You have a wonderfully romantic view of the world.

So hang on - if something doesn't work, we should just accept that? And if you don't want to accept it you're branded a romantic and get condescended at.. hmm.. I see. And there was me thinking the point was to try and make things better.

Very sloppy backhander. Everyone knows that they were way to the right of labrat.

So hang on - if something doesn't work, we should just accept that? And if you don't want to accept it you're branded a romantic and get condescended at.. hmm.. I see. And there was me thinking the point was to try and make things better.

You'll have to forgive me for being a cynic or realist then.

I just dont see the government lasting very long at all when the presure comes on.

Granted the ex-USSR had a very strong line in repression, but I really can't see that right-wingers connect in any way either with civil liberties; eg Maggie and the miners/Irish/anyone who disagreed with her/support for the charming Mr Pinochet; George Bush and Guantanamo; Germany 1933-45 etc etc. I did rather assume that David Davis' resignation was some sort of barking publicity stunt that mis-fired; I don't see the Terrorism laws being relaxed any time soon!

The IRA were rather more successful at killing people than islamic extremists appear to be in the UK, but we didn't have anywhere near the level of infringement of civil liberties that we do now.

but we didn't have anywhere near the level of infringement of civil liberties that we do now.

But if we did, would it have saved lives?

For anyone to turn round & say that Left wing government is more oppressive than a Right wing government & visa-versa is smoking opium.

But if we did, would it have saved lives?

I doubt it, they tried internment, found out that it didn't work, and possibly even increased terrorism, so they stopped it.

Tron - didn't the police ask for these anti-terrorism powers to allow them to do their jobs?

molgrips - if you want a police state, a good way to do that would be to give the police any powers they ask for.

Their job would be loads easier for example if they didn't need evidence, or could beat confessions out of suspects, etc.

To be fair, I think it was the security services (MI5,6 etc) who campaigned for these laws. The thing is, we'll never know if they're working or not.

I'm not left or right, I'm an anarchist. That's why I usually vote Liberal. BTW.

Camaroon and Cleggy have impressed me more since the election than at any time previously.

tron - Member

I was more bothered when a left wing government had them. Most of the world's major internal surveillance systems have been the product of left wing systems - the Stasi, the NKVD etc. The left wing is inherently more interested in controlling and monitoring citizens in my book.

non of these are left wing - all are totalitarain - not the same thing at all. totalitarian states with communist rehtoric does not make them left wing -

well last time the tories were in things werent great in that respect,
i certainly get the impression that the racist thugs of the 80s are no longer dominant in the force
would the stephen lawrence debacle have happened under nulabour?
probably no

obviously the demenezes family would argue otherwise-
could that have happened under the tories,
probably yes

imho

didn't the police ask for these anti-terrorism powers to allow them to do their jobs?

They did, but the Police have become increasingly political under Labour.

And the fact is, the Police will always ask for more powers in order to do their jobs - I'm sure detection rates would go through the roof if people were allowed to fall down the stairs, but they're not, and for good reasons.

I simply do not believe the terror threat exists at the level the government claims - events like the Mumbai attack have shown how much havoc a few well organised people can create, but they don't seem to be happening here. The vast majority of bombers we've seen here haven't even got the basic chemistry right.

i certainly get the impression that the racist thugs of the 80s are no longer dominant in the force

I'm of the impression that proper, full blown racists are simply far, far less common than they were 10 or 15 years ago, let along 25 years ago. Near enough everybody nowadays knows a few people of a different ethnicity, which makes being racist rather difficult.

TandemJeremy - Member
non of these are left wing - all are totalitarain - not the same thing at all. totalitarian states with communist rehtoric does not make them left wing -

Hahahahaha - talk about disowning the past!

So TJ I take it that on that basis you're happy for me to identify the BNP as a totalitarian party with socialist rhetoric rather than right wing?

true tron but i see what the daily wail readers call political correctness gone mad under nulabour as being a very good thing driving out the racists an bigots

No - the BNP are totalitarian with right wing rhetoric - as its a nazi party.

You get totalitarian parties that use right wing and left wing rhetoric. However no matter the rhetoric they remain totalitarian not capitalist or socialist

Its not about disowning the past - its about understanding what the politics are - the "communist" stares especially the puppet states where never socialist - they were totalitarian - a socialist government cannot be totalitarian

We keep hearing how bad Labour were for the economy: Does no one remember the Boom and Bust days of the early 90's? I certainly remember my mortgage rate going up from 7 to 13 percent; it just about finished ME off!
I think the media have a lot to answer for: The need to drive new stories constantly in this 24 hour news world with a focus the whole time on, apparently, just how crap politicians are at everything. The whole expenses scandal (with a few notable exceptions) was just a media witch hunt IMO; European countries were very bemeused; they couldn't imagaine politicians being as UN-corrupt as our.
The media assasinated Neil Kinnock and Micheal Foot; is it any suprise "Media-proof" New Labour was dreamed up. The biggest problem for them was that with all the spin people just didn't believe them when they DID get things right and really DID make real improvements to peoples lives. The funding for these things should have come from increased taxes however, and not by raiding the BofE reserves, but to do so would have been electoral suicide.

I'm pretty sure they're all as bad as each other. Cameron, Brown and Clegg are all politicians aka liars and power hungary etc.

No - the BNP are totalitarian with right wing rhetoric - as its a nazi party.

See, the clues in the title - national socialist!

If you have a look at the BNP's policies they're as far away from "right wing" as you can get - restriction of free trade, state ownership of utilities and production.

Its not just me thinks so - political compass is onside

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010

Once you accept that left and right are merely measures of economic position, the extreme right refers to extremely liberal economics that may be practised by social authoritarians or social libertarians.

Similarly, the extreme left identifies a strong degree of state economic control, which may also be accompanied by liberal or authoritarian social policies. It's muddled thinking to simply describe the likes of the British National Party as "extreme right". The truth is that on issues like health, transport, housing, protectionism and globalisation, their economics are left of Labour, let alone the Conservatives. It's in areas like police power, military power, school discipline, law and order, race and nationalism that the BNP's real extremism - as authoritarians - is clear. It's easy to see how the term national socialism came into being. The uncomfortable reality is that much of their support comes from former Labour voters.

[img] [/img]

a socialist government cannot be totalitarian

Hahahahaha! China for example!

molgrips - if you want a police state

We're patently not a police state, and even hinting at it is a gross insult to those who have truly lived under oppression.

Some people don't they're born.

Politicians all liars? If you get asked by the media to resign everytime THEY said you were not doing the things THEY thought were right and everytime you tried to make improvements THEY would only focus on possible negative fall-out from these improvements then wouldn't YOU start being a bit evassive about things?

Cable's got a Phd in Economics, and was chief economist at Shell. I'd hardly call that no experience at all.

Ah I see, you were talking about his experience with Shell - fair enough. I assumed that as you said [i]"second in command"[/i] to the Chancellor, you meant at number 11, or in cabinet, or even maybe, in government.

Well I've got experience with riding a single speed bike - does that count ?

Or are you saying that the tricky job of trying to get an oil company to actually show a profit, is the same "experience" as running the world's 5th largest economy and dealing with recession, 2 million unemployed, inflation, debt, allocating funds to education, health, housing, defence, trade agreements, the EU, IMF, etc, etc,

💡 Are confusing "qualifications" with "experience" ?

Vince Cable has no experience. Ken Clark does.