Sarah Palin? 😯

No one really gives a s**t.

They've just returned to their standard default position. Foaming at the mouth and looking like wild-eyed lunatics.

Next we can expect a raft of headline grabbing but totally ineffectual and mind-numbingly ill-conceived laws, apparently drafted by a 2 year old ADD

Meanwhile, as the prisons will now be full of people jailed for text messaging, there'll be no room for rapists and murderers who will probably get community service orders instead

So blindingly obvious to anyone whose IQ struggles into double figures. Clearly this discounts most members of the Tory front bench 🙄

Jeeez, best not visit the UK again. Having stated on STW a few months back that only a revolution would change anything in the UK I can expect to be arrested on surfacing from the tunnel and sent down for four years.

Don't give up hope. There is a solution.

Politics without political parties.

Think about it.

Our lives are configurable in almost every respect except politics.

Case in point: how would you react if Chain Reaction told you your only choice was a blue hybrid or a red single speed (well, there's a yellow unicycle somewhere out back, too, but no-one's wanted that since the 30s)?

Truth is, we've been sold a lie for generations. The lie is this:

You must be left wing or right wing. Therefore you must be a red or a blue (or ride a yellow unicycle that nobody wants and which, to be honest, is falling to pieces).

If you're a leftie, you hate Mr. Right. And vice versa. Reds and blues. Toffs and oiks. It's all a bit schoolyard, isn't it?

By reducing political possibilities to two (and a bit) bulk offers, we actually have very little choice - and less choice that's actually worth having.

The solution is to devise a political system that sees beyond wings and, like Ronnie Wood, only sees the whole bird.

Here's my idea:

The No Parties Party
Tough on Political Parties. Tough on the cause of political parties.

Let the revolution commence.

OK I want to apologise to those of you I have clashed with over the Tories, teej et al. I gave them a chance and they have now fianlly pissed me off and made me feel sick.

I wouldn't concern yourself too much, I suspect if the other lot were in it would make no discernible difference to most ordinary folk.

The headlines may well be different but the reality wouldn't

I suspect if the other lot were in it would make no discernible difference to most ordinary folk.

Hardly the most convincing argument I've heard as to why Tory policies are the best.

Hardly the most convincing argument I've heard as to why Tory policies are best

They certainly aren't I never have and never will vote for them but the other lot are so far to the right these days, there's hardly a difference

So who to love next?

Hippies fool!

[img] [/img]

So, are the Tories setting these harsh sentences, or the courts?

I thought the judiciary was supposed to be independent?

its 'back to basics' innit,
the stnadard torry mantra when they have no clue how to deal with the common folk of the land

the other lot are so far to the right these days, there's hardly a difference

Which is the problem with the political system in this country, that and the fact that it's seriously expensive to start up a new party, especially with the number of candidates that you need to field to stand a chance in the FPTP system...

Worth pointing out that in the early 1950s the Conservatives had almost 3 million members (now they have just 250,000) and Labour had more than 1 million (166,000 today).

I've never spoken to anyone who admitted to being part of the 250,000 or the 166,000. Anyone on here carry one of them red or blue cards?

I know a small number of people in each camp. I stick by my mantras of not trusting anyone who's involved in politics and reckoning that only people who don't want to be in politics should be allowed to be politicians as nothing I've seen of them has come close to changing my mind.

Thanks clubber - so there are some lurking about then?

I'm of the opinion that British politics is a modern-day tragedy. Agree that politicians are almost uniformly goat-humpers. But these goat-humpers affect every element of our day-to-day lives... A time's gotta come when a better, non goat-humping approach wins the day... I hope.

Anyone on here carry one of them red or blue cards

I suppose lots [me included] are associated members of the Labour Party

camo16 has it. When we start thinking for ourselves and stop viewing everything in life through whichever of the 2 party lenses suits our own upbringing/values/prejudices/blindspots/biases/ambitions then maybe we'll all be a bit more empowered,thoughtful and a bit happier.

I've seen several old friend entirely miss all the opportunities they had to live a fulfilled life because of their political views, it blinded them to all the good stuff and the ability to accept other people as they are.

Oh and maybe look at our own actions instead of blaming politicians for everything. Do you really think the people you meet who are happy and fulfilled change when the party they don't agree with comes into power?

top tip: read the newspaper that suits your politics and then read one which opposes them. And see the difference in the 'facts' you're being fed... you'll feel better for it...

reckoning that only people who don't want to be in politics should be allowed to be politicians

I agree, same with cops, anyone who wants to be acop should be excluded from doing so.

Politics and cops should be like jury service, pass an intelligence test and then be forced to serve for a period of time...

Exactly, brooess.

Party politics is a great deception in my view. It narrows our thought processes and streamlines attitudes into aggregated blocks, which are labelled accordingly as 'left' and 'right'. Everyone follows suit and, as sheep, repeat the phraseology with pride.

I don't want to be left or right. I want life in this country to improve. And that's where the political party model falls on its backside.

Ages ago I was going to write an article about this - but was convinced by well wishers that it would be a total waste of time, because nobody would read it.

These were my issues with our system then. I described them as Seven Deadly Sins:

1. Tribalism – political Parties and the agglomeration of democracy
2. Sleight of Hand - the representative democracy that doesn’t represent and isn’t democratic
3. Grandee-ism – Parliamentary abuses and interaction with the electorate and media
4. Mendacity – the utility of lying your ass off
5. Amateurism – public servants (Prime Ministers, Cabinet Members and Back Benchers) with no competence to govern, other than the ability to orate (wow) and a history or law degree
6. Quick-fix-ism – the expediency of short-term solutions and the problems that beset long-term decision-making in the UK
7. Thinking ‘Big – the globalising political direction; which organisations/agencies make the decisions; the disenfranchising of local political democracy/taxation

Not a best-seller perhaps...

YES camo & Brooess. I was thinking just yesterday that all parliamentary candidates should be independent, an end to party politics.

Write that article

I'd read it, and I reckon I'd agree with a great deal of it.

Unfortunately Camo16 what you describe are all the weaknesses/limitations of humans in groups, when power becomes available, and are essentially the human condition. Corporates are the same IME, as are the organised religions. The same mistakes have been made time and time again throughout history...

You'll find that all the solutions you think of to these problems are all the things your parents, grandparents, 'nice' people, the best of your school teachers, ancient proverbs etc have been telling you for years.

I've come to the conclusion that all I can do is live the best life I can within the framework of the society I find myself in. And if I can help other people do the same, then that's enough really.

Oh and when you meet the manipulators, psychos, insecure and selfish types, run very fast in the opposite direction. but when you find nice, generous, nice people, stick to them like glue...

I was thinking just yesterday that all parliamentary candidates should be independent, an end to party politics.

You can vote for independents right now you know - they aren't excluded from elections.

People don't vote for political parties because they have to, they do it because they want to.

Every election has its fair share of loony independent candidates.

You can vote for independents right now you know - they aren't excluded from elections.

People don't vote for political parties because they have to, they do it because they want to.

Every election has its fair share of loony independent candidates.

Do people really vote for political parties because they want to? I mean, some might but I've never spoken to one who did...

The argument I hear most often is "I hate the Tories/Labour, but I don't want to see that other lot in power."

In other words, it's the-best-of-a-bad-lot option.

Independents lose from the start because nobody believes they can win (so the majority of those who would vote for said Independent do the above), or, even if they think the Independent can win, the victory is purely local and has a negligible effect on a national scene.

Also, some of the independents probably aren't loonies. Many of candidates representing the orthodoxy are.

I vote for camo16.

PS: thanks to ourkidsam and sobriety. Someday I may write the article. And politics in this country will change forever.

Wrecker, thanks for the vote. I won't let you down - until I become PM, after which I will probably pull your pants down. Sorry, but that's human nature. Power corrupts. Come to me, power baby... come to me.

Do people really vote for political parties because they want to? I mean, some might but I've never spoken to one who did..

If you've never met someone who's a member of a political party or spoken to anyone that voted for who they want, then maybe writing about party politics isn't for you?

Pragmatically if you didn't have parties (and party whips) creating voting blocks you'd struggle to get any laws passed.
You;d never get 600+ people to agree
have you ever tried getting 12 friends to agree on a restaurant bill?

I read some research a few years ago which said the big change from the early to late 20th century in politics was in the early years, no-one trusted politicians but they did defer to them (and authority generally). In the later years (post-Punk?) they still didn't trust them, but no longer deferred.
so kind of same old same old tbh

Good point, uplink. Think I'll stick to chatting on the forum and generally making a nuisance of myself...

Maybe I talk to the wrong people. Some of them come from a bad background. Many have no suitable father figures...

Are you one of the right people? Do you believe in a political party? If so, why?

Independents lose from the start because nobody believes they can win

Er no, independents can win if enough people vote for them, and sometimes they do. The reason independents rarely win is that generally no one wants to vote for them.

some of the independents probably aren't loonies

And Carlsberg is only probably the best lager in the world.

Do you believe in a political party? If so, why?

Not any more, they kicked what enthusiasm I had out of me a long time ago

You didn't piss me off but I accept the apology.

I thought this was to be about "classifieds-gate"

Phew!! read the title and thought you were gonna tell us your Covert is sh1t! 🙂

Wrecker, thanks for the vote. I won't let you down - until I become PM, after which I will probably pull your pants down

Sounds alright actually. 😀

Two parties? Try moving to Scotland. At least there's a credible left-of-centre alternative.

There is?

Hmmm, the Tories get into power and then act like Tories, not much surprise really.
I think you should apologies to yourself for wasting precious time involved in totally pointless debate on here.

Two parties? Try moving to Scotland. At least there's a credible left-of-centre alternative.
Traditionally the Scottish labour party was also left of centre but now that it is run from englandshire it must toe the party line sadly , however i reckon eck is daein' a grand job

 

Edukator - Member

Jeeez, best not visit the UK again. Having stated on STW a few months back that only a revolution would change anything in the UK I can expect to be arrested on surfacing from the tunnel and sent down for four years.

The way i read that it sounded like you were just going to walk through. Apparently getting on the train with a ticket and ID/passport helps. 😀

Hmmm, the Tories get into power and then act like Tories, not much surprise really.
I think you should apologies to yourself for wasting precious time involved in totally pointless debate on here.

Well yes it was a general apology. I honestly wanted to give them a chance. After the labour debacle, I hoped for a minute that maybe things might change..

I honestly wanted to give them a chance.

You wanted to give them a second chance ? That's very generous of you.

The Tories don't do "second chances".

Unless of course, it's a very important person like former editor from News International Andy Coulson ....... Cameron was very keen to give him a second chance.

But for everyone else there is no second chance. If you steal some cheap mineral water from a supermarket for example, then you can expect to get 6 months, despite not having a previous criminal record.

Zero tolerance is a wonderful thing. Unless it's applied to MPs, bankers, newspaper editors, etc. etc.

Yes Ernie, I think I realise that, hence the apology. Is this not enough for you?

Of course it is toys, I'm very forgiving............I'm that kinda guy.

😀

I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Teej, imagine the joy when you apologise for unstintingly supporting labour!!

I don't, never have and I doubt I ever will do

I must admit that I had hoped that the Lib-Dems would be a moderating force for the Tories (I actually got the exact election result that I wanted).

Unfortunately the alternative is still unpallatable. Ed Milliband is still wet and useless and the Lib-Dems appear to have abandoned many of their principles.

It is however a little unfair to castigate the Toty party for the stiff sentnaces as the judiciary is independent and I suspect that many of the sentances will be reduced in appeal. Although unfortunately many will have completed their sentances by the time this happens. The main problem however is not the sentances but the lack of consitancy which brings the whole system into disrepute.

The Tories are right however on the auterity measures as the deficit is too high and to date we have successfully retained the AAA status. The trick now is to keep this while maintaining growth (however slow). I have zero confidence that Labour could have achieved this.

frodo - tbh I agree with their economic polcies too, and their "ideologically motivated spending cuts" . Just not this..

Come on guys! Let's raise our horizons a bit. Just because we have ended up with 2 (or is it 3?) sets of goat-humping capitalist managers whose real political differences are scarcely discernable to the naked eye doesn't mean that it's all we have to accept, or indeed that this is all there is.

It's a big world out there.

In previous generations and centuries, people progressed by recognising that what they had to put up with was intolerable, and therefore developing political and economic theories and ideas to challenge the status quo. When they rose up, they had an alternative to strive for - not just mindless **** you-ism. Maybe that's what we need to do again now, so that we can say 'sod you' to Tory, Labour, Lib-Dem and any other small minded self seeker who seeks to restrict our choices.

There's an old anarchist (not that I am one) slogan that I rather like:

'Be realistic - demand the impossible!'

Way to go............

Politics is just a way to distract people from the fact that we all have to pitch in and sort this shit out.

The influence of the rich and poweful must be removed as they only care about money and we that is to say all of us need to take an active part in sorting out our future.

That however would take great organisation and leadership, it would also take a lot of sacrafice!

The influence of the rich and poweful must be removed as they only care about money and we that is to say all of us need to take an active part in sorting out our future.

House of Commons Research says 65.1% of voters turned out in the 2010 election.

1 in 3 people should therefore be banned from complaining about anything the government does...

There's an old anarchist (not that I am one) slogan that I rather like:

'Be realistic - demand the impossible!'

Way to go............

And that there strikes at the very heart of much that is wrong with British politics today. The lobbed sided alignment of British politics in which [i]"real political differences are scarcely discernible"[/i] owes much to the destructive nature of Trotskite tactics, which very much include the "be realistic - demand the impossible" strategy. Although of course the failures and betrayals of the non-Marxist left also clearly played a huge role in discrediting the established Left.

As someone who can fairly be described as 'far left' in that my goal is the eventual overthrow of the existing social and economic order and the establishment of a fully democratic model, I totally reject the ultra-leftist "demand the impossible" strategy.

It is based on the false premiss that making impossible demands will lead to a revolutionary situation whereby the capitalist system will be unable to satisfy demands, and will therefore simply 'implode'.

It completely ignores the consequences of highly probable failure, and the devastating effect this would have on the working classes, whose interests are merely dismissed as subservient to achieving idealogical goals. My ideology exists solely to serve the people, I do not believe that people exist to serve an ideology.

It also completely ignores the stark reality that the working classes are very clearly unlikely to make impossible and unachievable demands. And that to offer this as a practical solution/alternative simply further alienates working people from the Left.

It is for those reasons stated, that I ardently believe the strategy has to be realistic and achievable demands. I will always work for "immediate gains" which serve the best interests of working people within a capitalist system. I am more than happy to engage in "class collaboration", so derided by the ultra-left, if it helps to achieve this.

And it is with this aim in mind, that I am committed to the struggle to re-establish Britain as a social-democratic society. Social democracy by far represents the most workable and acceptable form of capitalism. Capitalism in all of its guises, including social democracy, will never provide the answers - social democracy simply changes the priorities. But don't even begin to think that you can make the argument for revolutionary change if you can't even win the argument for social democracy.

One step at a time......don't demand the impossible.

And desist from infantile talk

[img] [/img]

Bloody hell Ernie, that was impressive, however it would all take self-sacrifice and a unified mindset of working towards a goal that will never happen...Unfortunately.

...however it would all take self-sacrifice and a unified mindset of working towards a goal that will never happen...Unfortunately.

What won't happen, human progress ? ........of course it will. I have an unshatterable faith in the inevitability of human progress. You might dismiss me as a hopelessly romantic idealist who is deluding himself with wishful thinking, but I actually have thousands of years worth of evidence to back up my claims.

Indeed it is those who believe that our present society in 2011 represents the pinnacle of human evolution, and that no further progress can or will be achieved, who are hopelessly deluded. And their naive arrogance has much in common with those who 100 years ago, or 200 years ago, or 500 years, and or even 2,000 years ago, also believed that their society had reached the maximum limit of possible human development, and who could not envisage any further progress.

2000 years ago Romano-Britain represented the very best human society had ever achieved, and yet since then human society has relentlessly and steadfastly continued to evolve and progress. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that we have now reached our final destination, and that all problems associated with ordered human society have been resolved. In fact the evidence is all around us that clearly shows we can't even satisfy basic human needs. Governmental politics across the globe are in fact just exercises in crises management. With economics being more or less the permanent number one crises issue.

This isn't it mate, we've still a lot of progress to make. And we [i]will[/i] make progress. And it will be for the better - it always is. Although I am fully aware that for every 3 steps forward, mankind tends to take 2 steps backwards, but the general direction is beyond doubt - society is indisputably better now than it was 100 years ago, and society a 100 years ago was indisputably better than society 500 years previously, and so on.

But whilst the inevitability of progress is clear, it's manner and time-scale is much harder to predict given the complex nature of the chaos theory/butterfly effect/dialectical materialism. So whilst many could predict with complete certainty the eventual fall of the Apartheid regime for example, no one could predict precisely how and when. And things can move pretty damn fast too - who could have predicted the Arab Spring or what sparked it ?

Then again sometimes it can take several centuries for fundamental changes to occur in society, such as in the transition from feudalism to full bourgeois republicanism/constitutional monarchy in the European nations.

Eventually human society will even evolve beyond the limitations of the most advanced form democracy, when there will no longer be a need for majorities and minorities ......of that I have no doubt.

[i]"I have seen the promised land.... And I might not get there with you, but I want you to know…that we as a people will get to the promised land!"[/i] ......Martin Luther King 😀

Interesting stuff Ernie. This I want to believe..

Eventually human society will even evolve beyond the limitations of the most advanced form democracy, when there will no longer be a need for majorities and minorities ......of that I have no doubt

I think that's gonna take something chemical or biological. Humans aren't wired to be like that unfortunately. Maybe everyone should be forced to do some mind altering drugs!

I think that's gonna take something chemical or biological. Humans aren't wired to be like that unfortunately. Maybe everyone should be forced to do some mind altering drugs!

Human beings managed perfectly well organised in autonomous/self governing societies for hundreds of thousands of years.......evolution wired us up to be like that.

It all started going pear-shaped about 3 thousand or so years ago.

I blame wheat.

Go to bed now please everyone.

Surplus is the root of all evil.

cheese n onion in a blue bag is the root of all evil. and don't you forget it. Elfin is being patronising. time to hit the hay surplus...

Good point about society evolving,but that is pretty much a given,150 years ago we hung children. BUT does the "collective" want change, or are too many of us comfy, or getting along well enough to put up with they way things are? I often think that the likes of Green etc are the new Feudal Nobility,and it took 20 generations to get rid of their power. Right; I am off on me DoE,apologies to anybody else using the Cairngorms rain is my fault this weekend,It would be nice if this thread remained civil,which would buck recent trends on here.I look forward to seeing how it develops.

So you describe society continuing to evolve as "a given", but you're not sure that change will happen because you question whether people want it ? 😕 You do understand that to evolve means to undergo change don't you ?

And change doesn't always occur because people "want it". As Harold Macmillan who I'm fond of quoting, once said, "Events, my dear boy, events".

Ok, the [u]potential[/u] for society to evolve is a given, is it in a hell of a lot of wealthy peoples interest for it to? Nope.