What do you call “the far left”?
I guess it's not really about what we call it, it's about what the swing-voters call it. Those who might be tempted to move to a centerist Labour, but not one they consider to be "too far" to the left.
How you define it, and how you fix it is the million dollar question.
embrace the far left.
What you call the far left was centre-right consensus a couple of decades ago. You're being gaslighted into believing something that is not in your interests. Like I said, wake the **** up!
Oh, so far he's ditched:
Banning the Koran.
Nexit.
Banning mosques.
Early days, within 24 hours he'll be left with, "immigration- bad"
Reality is a bit further to the left it seems...
Oh, They do have a version of I'm a Celebrity.
It's called "Bobo's in the bush"... So he has his plan B in place.
Politics is only relative. Not absolute. The centre always shifts with the passing of time, so trying to relate political alignments to the standards of the past is a waste of time. Who would’ve guessed 40 years ago that a Tory Prime Minister would enact a law to enable gay marriage?
What do you call “the far left”?
I guess it’s not really about what we call it, it’s about what the swing-voters call it.
I beg to differ. If you call this far left:
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
There is a reasonable chance that "swing-voters" will call it far left.
If however you call it 'necessary immediate policies which will benefit ordinary people' there is a reasonable chance that they will be more receptive.
Who would’ve guessed 40 years ago that a Tory Prime Minister would enact a law to enable gay marriage?
Good example. A positive step forward, taken by a right of centre coalition... but what did it do? It resulted in many political activists moving from the Conservative party to UKIP... another nugget for the far right to feed on. Similar occurs in the Netherlands... it's not just economic issues that the far right feed on, but social progress.
EDIT: oh good, this is turning into “that thread” that everyone avoids… forget it
dazh
As if. I'd settle for the rich paying their taxes, my kids being able to go to university without putting themselves tens of thousands in debt, and being able to get a GP appointment or not having to wait 12 hours in A&E. Apparently these things are no longer 'affordable' or 'practical' when they were 20 years ago. I'm sick of centrist politicians telling us this stuff is too difficult or too expensive, and I doubt I'm the only one.
oh good, this is turning into “that thread” that everyone avoids… forget it
That's because this is all connected. The core problem in this country and others in the west is a complete failure of leadership. The people who want to lead us are not interested in actually doing anything that helps us, and the result will be the rise of the likes of Farage et al.
The Dutch like all other European. Countries, except UK and Belarus, have some flavour of proportional representation, so having to be in coalition to gain power ensures that the worst excesses don't happen because of the more liberal coalition partner. Something similar happened in Poland and Spain.
UK has no such safety mechanism hence this tory shower on just 43% of the votes.
Ultimately have to vote tactically to #GTTO
You’re being gaslighted into believing something that is not in your interests. Like I said, wake the **** up!
Ah yes... that old chestnut. Don't tell me.... we're all unthinking drones? Capitalist stooges and slaves to the military-industrial complex? Mere corporate lackies? Totally incapable of independent thought? Needing our opinions spoon fed to us by Murdoch and GB News?
Does that about cover it?
Whereas you and your enlightened fellow travellers possess not only superior intellect, but a unique insight and all the answers?
I don't know why more people aren't naturally drawn to the far left, because they're not at all sanctimonious, preachy, superior, condescending and partonising in the least...
I don’t know why more people aren’t naturally drawn to the far left, because they’re not at all sanctimonious, preachy, superior, condescending and partonising in the least…
Mr Irony doesnt pay you many visits does he?
Klunk
Free Member
It’s one of the vagaries of PR a far right party can achieve a “massive” “shock” “victory” (channelling my inner Daily Fail) with 23.5% of the vote. It’s what the tories are polling at the moment :/ .
That is the paradox isn't it?
Overall I'm in favour of PR but what you said is correct.
Any thoughts on this aspect of PR anyone? Genuine question by the way!
If they want to govern, they will have to do so on a policy platform that is not entirely their own. Where as with our voting system a minority share of the vote can allow a party to rule without concessions to any voters that did not vote for them.
Any thoughts on this aspect of PR anyone?
Although they have got the highest votes they still need to go into coalition with someone else which will, likely, moderate their position.
I would argue its less problematic than fptp where they can effectively hijack another party anyway.
Plus of course its also democratic and is an argument for the other parties to put forward better arguments to attract those voters away. As opposed to just chasing swing voters.
Any thoughts on this aspect of PR anyone? Genuine question by the way!
Never been a supporter of PR. This is one of the reasons, the main one though is because it encourages/enables inaction and inertia, which gives vested interests the opportunity to prevent change for the better. On the surface PR looks like a great way to achieve 'consensus', in reality though it just results in nothing much happening. When things don't work - and lots of stuff isn't working right now - we need to change course and try something else. I think most voters understand that, which is why far right snake oil salesmen are doing well at the moment, because their supposed 'serious' opponents don't seem to get it.
Any thoughts on this aspect of PR anyone? Genuine question by the way!
In Spain the biggest party gets the first chance at forming a government (including other parties as junior members of the coalition). If they fail to get the votes, the second biggest gets a go. Which is what has happened this time round.
I’d settle for the rich paying their taxes, my kids being able to go to university without putting themselves tens of thousands in debt, and being able to get a GP appointment
Says every far-whatever snake oil salesman when they're on the election stump, throw in a little them and us tribalism to make them feel like they're the downtrodden and bingo...
Never been a supporter of PR. This is one of the reasons, the main one though is because it encourages/enables inaction and inertia, which gives vested interests the opportunity to prevent change for the better.
The irony here is that this is exactly what has happened in the UK
Seems astonishingly myopic to claim the UK is better off with FPTP
Says every far-whatever snake oil salesman when they’re on the election stump
You think these things aren't achievable? It's not a lot to ask IMO, yet it seems beyond the imagination or capability of most mainstream politicians. If democracy isn't capable of delivering such basic requirements, then what's the point in it?
Seems astonishingly myopic to claim the UK is better off with FPTP
What we're experiencing in the UK isn't a result of FPTP, it's the result of unchallenged corporate power and it's influence on politics. FPTP is probably the best/only opportunity of changing things, but it needs politicians who have the courage, motivation and capability to do it.
This has just popped up on my twitter - looks like the UK would like their politicians to be more accountable:
What we’re experiencing in the UK isn’t a result of FPTP, it’s the result of unchallenged corporate power and it’s influence on politics
But that unchallenged corporate power's influence is because the tories are taking their donations from them. If we had a PR system, all of us who don't like the way the tories do politics would have created a counterbalance, with a more representative parliament, to the free rein they have, and the corporates wouldn't have so much influence.
As it is FPTP gave the Tories an 80 seat majority on less than 50%, and an untrammellled ability to take the p1ss
Have you noticed all the far right politicians have disastrous hair cuts!
Johnson and this Dutch git know perfectly well. They could have a good haircut and suit, but they're signalling they don't care too much about your boring conventions. Trump otoh really thinks he looks good.
When are ordinary folk going to work out that having the far right in power has never being beneficial to them?
Maybe a decade or two, maybe more. Either way, they've pretty much figured out that neo-liberal centrist parties are not much use either.
A lot of right-wing regimes survived large parts of the 20th century due to geopolitical factors and cheap, accessible oil. This time, people electing far-right parties has a very desperate and end-of-the-road feel to it. Holland could lock up every single migrant and it will solve few, if any problems. What is so depressing about the situation is that right-wing parties offer no real solutions since the actual solutions go completely against their DNA.
For me, people are clearly realizing that something is, indeed, up. The lifestyle of the late and early 20/21st century is slowly slipping away from millions of citizens. They are angry, but when this is expressed politically, it manifests as blame. Take 20mph zones or ULEZ for instance, if only those communist-hippy councilors would go away, our problems would be solved. Of course, this is a fantasy.
The absurd and tragic element this is that as inequality, climate change, and the results of politically corrupt governments amount to little more than prostitutes for corporations increase, those on the right will pivot and blame the solutions, entrenching the negative effects while as those negative effects become more acute, citizens demand more and more extreme policies.
FPTP is probably the best/only opportunity of changing things, but it needs politicians who have the courage, motivation and capability to do it.
FPTP requires very large coalitions/alliances to be formed BEFORE the public get to vote. Compromise is baked in before elections. If you want more MPs prepared to act outside the parameters required by that reality... and the chance for them to build support for their agenda from within parliament, then some form of PR is required.
But that unchallenged corporate power’s influence is because the tories are taking their donations from them. If we had a PR system
Right now the Germans are having a somewhat dark night of the soul because they've realised that their reliance on cheap Russian Gas and Oil, and the corporate greed that fuelled (excuse pun) it has consequences. PR systems aren't any more immune to the sorts of corporate gerrymandering than we see in FPTP. Political parties will always be the target of large vested interests.
Europe needs a broad political consensus like it saw in 1945. Hopefully without the 6 years of horror that proceeded it. But the challenges that we face now, be they environmental, political, media driven, technological are all so massive that without collective agreement we're all going to struggle. The rise of far right and populism is the growing pains/ rejection of that (for some; horrible) truth.
Compromise is baked in before elections
Not much compromise baked into the Oven Ready Deal offered in 2019. Single issue of Brexit, and now everything they are doing is clearly counter to what opinion polls tell us the British electorate want.
My take away was why do we need 650 odd MPs if the Dutch only need 150. That would save us a few quid
those on the right will pivot blame the precise solutions to our problems, entrenching the negative effects while consolidating power.
With the enthusiastic help of those who spend all their time ranting about loony lefties and sixth formers. 🙄
(great post BTW, agree with every word)
PR [...]. encourages/enables inaction and inertia,
yeah, but does it have downsides?
As someone who elects themselves as very much a centrist albeit not a sit on the fence type but a best of both less of the worst, this has been quite interesting to read.
yeah, but does it have downsides?
You want things to stay as they are?
why do we need 650 odd MPs if the Dutch only need 150.
Because the population of the UK is about four times bigger than the population of the Netherlands?
Because the population of the UK is about four times bigger than the population of the Netherlands?
Agreed, although the House of Lords has more unelected legislators than there are democratically elected MEPs at Strasbourg/Brussels, so something needs to give
Never been a supporter of PR. This is one of the reasons, the main one though is because it encourages/enables inaction and inertia, which gives vested interests the opportunity to prevent change for the better
Have you not been watching the UK, or is this satire?
Oh, and the opposite of the "far right" is "not far right".
Have you not been watching the UK, or is this satire?
Very much not satire. As I've said many times, the closer power is to the people, the better. PR moves it further away and obfuscates it. The problems we have in our 'democracy' is not too much power in the hands of voters, it's too little.
I dont think the parties can change this situation. I do think a change to proportional representation of some kind could help. We need much tighter rules on lobbying, and I mean eye wateringly tight.I think there can be no room for racists, sexists or those with any other hate based agenda. That said we need to get out of our "silos" and discuss politics with passion but without any othering or venom. Ì'm a Scots Nat with many Unionist pals.
PR removes choices at the ballot box, as a small handful of parties seek to achieve a mass of support big enough to have any chance of affecting any change at all.