[Closed] Green Party is like a car crash...

which means they are just as unprincipled as any other politician.

Huh? They have principles, therefore they are unprincipled?

Tell that to millions of Bangladeshis who will lose their homes to rising sea levels and millions of sub Saharan Africans who will, unless they move, become Saharan Africans.

And that would be precisely the reason as to why I agree with the Greens policy of relaxing immigration controls, even if I don't agree with much else.

yes - because hiding your idealogy behind the principles of another party is logically unprincipled because you're selling a lie i.e. vote for me I'm green (but not really I'm red)

Having a pop at airport expansion and "gas guzzling" cars is missing the point entirely.

Not bothering to change the small things because the big things are still there is in fact missing the point far more.

Deciding what to do about China's emissions is really a difficult problem. However, when you next buy a car it would take zero effort to choose something economical. Well, unless you have trouble getting over your vanity perhaps?

I agree with the Greens policy of relaxing immigration controls

Are you sure they have said that? As far as I am aware the Green Party's immigration policy differs from the other major parties only in that theirs would be fairer, more just, and more humane.

yes - because hiding your idealogy behind the principles of another party is logically unprincipled because you're selling a lie i.e. vote for me I'm green (but not really I'm red)

So you think the party's name is more important than their policies? They really aren't hiding anything, in fact the whole reason this discussion is happening is because they're so open about their policies - more so than any of the other parties.

Are you sure they have said that? As far as I am aware the Green Party's immigration policy differs from the other major parties only in that theirs would be fairer, more just, and more humane.

In the context of climate change that would entail a relaxing of immigration controls, or at least, a huge increase in the amount of asylum seekers.

Which I totally agree with, I want to watch the developed nations squirm as the results of their collective idiocy turn up in a hoard on their doorstep.

By 2050 there's no way in hell the equatorial regions are going to be even remotely economically viable.

yes - because hiding your idealogy behind the principles of another party is logically unprincipled because you're selling a lie i.e. vote for me I'm green (but not really I'm red)

And the Conservatives claim to be green, when they're blue. And Labour are, more and more blue. Lib Dems are economically blue. Damn these parties and not just picking one colour and sticking to it!

Bloody Greens hiding their socialism in plain sight on the website and in the main policies.

So you think the party's name is more important than their policies?

because hiding your idealogy...

ffs. we're back to that "they're just a bunch of closet commies" bollocks which right-wingers say when they can't come up with a coherent argument. Everyone from Miliband to Obama gets accused of that.

afaik for some of the councillors if they'd actually bannered themselves under the Socialist Party on the voting form rather than the Green party they'd not have been elected.

If the conservatives called themselves something else, perhaps "The Legalise Gay Marriage Party", they'd lose votes - this is a truly daft line of reasoning. The Green party have the economic policies they do because they were what were argued for by their members.

In any case, if you don't think the Greens have more of an environmental focus to their policies than any of the other major parties then you must be looking at a different policy document to me.

ffs. we're back to that "they're just a bunch of closet commies" bollocks

Why do right-wing ranters both here and the United States use such childish schoolyard taunting language?

😆

(Insert favourite picture of politically-correct ironing here).

Here's a nice picture for you Woppit :

[img] [/img]

Since you have clearly proved that having a vaguely sensible discussion with you isn't feasible.

Bless.

Ernie - no don't put me in your right wing BS narrative

ffs. we're back to that "they're just a bunch of closet commies" bollocks

As a natural Green who is more left wing I'm ****ing incandescent at the direction the UK Green Party has gone - very similar to the 1983 Labour Party manifesto

As a natural Green who is more left wing I'm ****ing incandescent at the direction the UK Green Party has gone - very similar to the 1983 Labour Party manifesto

It's gone in the direction its members wanted it to go in. Maybe if you were more than just a "natural Green" and were instead an "actual Green" you could have done something about that.

I'm talking about the Green party council elections in Brighton - many were surprised at how a green agenda has been compromised by what the Grauniad refers to as Watermelons

That's right, I seem to recall there's been a load of infighting with tactical voting within the council between the watermelons and the mangos
One's green on the outside and pink in the middle and the other is yellow on the inside.

I live outside the Brighton constituency but spend plenty of driving around it and working on the streets...

On the face of it I like the changes the Greens have implemented...I'm quite content with the 20mph speed limits (OK, perhaps I don't always abide but my average speed has certainly dropped).

They've converted loads of urban dual carriageway (where traffic tends to compete to get away from each set of lights and the speed inevitably creeps up over the limit) and made the inside lanes bus and/or cycle lanes. The traffic queues may be longer but they move quicker as the pinch points have been eliminated.

The cycle lanes seem to be well designed - the London road has cycle lanes that loop behind the bus stops so that reduces conflict and tailgating buses, Old Shoreham Road has cycle lanes on an 'outer' pavement that stops traffic crossing into it and also has advance green lights so cyclists can get a head start across junctions. I've not been down Edward Street for a few weeks but that dual lane drag strip will apparently have inside lanes replaced with cycle lanes and shared bus/cycle lanes but wide enough for buses to pass cyclists.

I work in most of the major towns in East Sussex and parts of Surrey/Kent, and Brighton & Hove seem to be streets ahead in moving away from a painted line and some green tarmac to keep bikes in the gutter.

Regarding motorbike V car pollution, got to admit I was surprised I didn't get flamed universally! There are arguments in both directions but it seems pretty clear that pollution controls on bikes in general are way behind cars, #1 on Google results is http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/dec/21/travelandtransport.transportintheuk . Even if you argue that the bike is less polluting, its not comparative, i.e. a bike might emit 75% of the pollutants but only weighs 25% of the average car. Maybe pollution controls are more important than dissuading the use of bigger bikes.

Even if you argue that the bike is less polluting, its not comparative, i.e. a bike might emit 75% of the pollutants but only weighs 25% of the average car. Maybe pollution controls are more important than dissuading the use of bigger bikes.

the London road has cycle lanes that loop behind the bus stops so that reduces conflict and tailgating buses

I love that. My visits to Brighton tend to be limited to the occasional bike ride there, I've always been impressed by the cycle lanes that loop behind the bus stops. It's such a simple and effective solution which allows cyclists to keep moving without the need for unnecessary stopping and starting.

I wish we had such a cycle friendly road infrastructure in Croydon. I guess that in the end it's the difference between having the active involvement of cyclists in road infrastructure planning and having people who [i]think[/i] they understand the needs of cyclists.