You can’t compare Belarus – a dictatorship, and UK Parliament as somehow equal or equivilent, it’s silly.
No, but FPTP allows massive majorities if a very small percentage of the population votes for a particular party and the rest of the vote is split among others.
Also, the Tories have shown over the last few years just how ill equipped the UK parliamentary system is to deal with someone who is willing to ignore the 'good chap' system that it has been relying on up until now.
Just imagine the fun Farage could have if he gets 30% of the vote (based on 65% turnout). With FPTP you are gambling that no more than 20% of the population are stupid enough to vote for the ****.
This is because they promote simplistic answers to complex problems.
Yup & sadly cos most people aren't interested in politics - they don't have time to look up from just surviving to notice much difference. They just know it's shit & think all politicians are the same.
As soon as someone says we can fix your life they listen, people aren't interested in the minute details.
It's a legacy of an education system that doesn't during the school years educate kids in politics.
I remember when I was at school we had mock elections around 1990 - every single person who stood as a candidate was bullied mercilessly, that's how we see politicians. As soon as someone claims to be like us & not them it's an easy vote winner.
Or maybe it’s because they speak in words that working people can understand and don’t display the superiority and snobbery that is a hallmark of many progressive liberals?
Hmm, so only 'working people' have to deal with superiority and snobbery? Interesting.
I only really have a problem with it if those words are, 'It's all the brown people's fault so let's get rid of them' and people actually go for that. But then that's not something that only happens with 'working people' so I'm not sure what your point is.
This forum is a case in point, how many times have we heard about stupid working class people who shouldn’t be allowed to vote or have their say in ‘complex’ issues?
Would you like a sword to battle this strawman or will you be OK just pummeling it with your fists?
This forum is a case in point, how many times have we heard about stupid working class people who shouldn’t be allowed to vote or have their say in ‘complex’ issues?
I say that quite often but don't include the words "working class" as I don't discriminate.
Maybe stupid is harsh but what do you call someone who thinks Reform are the answer to their problems?
What do you call someone with very little money who votes Tory time after time even after seeing the outcome of them voting tory?
If you really want to get to the nub of broken politics, then I'd suggest that starting with reforming MP candidate selection would do more for proper representation. The vast majority of our current and future MPs will have been actually selected by a small (tiny in comparison to the wider constituency) group of very politically active people in their local party. People that are more likely to hold more extreme views than the general population. Until you deal with that problem, shifting the numbers of them at parliament a bit, is just shuffling the deckchairs.
If you really want to get to the nub of broken politics, then I’d suggest that starting with reforming MP candidate selection would do more for proper representation. The vast majority of our current and future MPs will have been actually selected by a small (tiny in comparison to the wider constituency) group of very politically active people in their local party. People that are more likely to hold more extreme views than the general population. Until you deal with that problem, shifting the numbers of them at parliament a bit, is just shuffling the deckchairs.
Hey, if you want to go down the Sortition road I am very much down for that. We think it's absolutely fine for jury trials so I'm not sure why people are so against it for government.
But until then we have to accept that politics is going to attract people who want to be politicians no matter what the voting system. So let's at least get a voting system that more closely reflects the way people actually vote.
Would you like a sword to battle this strawman or will you be OK just pummeling it with your fists?
If you are genuinely unaware of the validity of Daz's claim it simply emphasizes just how bad the problem is on here.
You can't even see it ffs.
Who GAS about Belarus
I think it's a good counterexample to the claim that
FPTP is a great way of denying fascists power.
There's only two countries in Europe that use FPTP for parliaments: the UK and Belarus. One of them is a parliamentary democracy and the other is a dictatorship. FPTP has at best at 50% success rate in "denying fascists power". That's not "great". In fact it's pretty rubbish...
...or maybe in fact the voting system just isn't that determinative of much.
If you are genuinely unaware of the validity of Daz’s claim it simply emphasizes just how bad the problem is on here.
Well, if it's happening all the time then finding a couple of quotes to illustrate it shouldn't be too difficult, should it?
Or maybe you could start by explaining what he meant by 'working people'. I suspect I know what he means but it's such a vague catch all term it could mean literally anything (except the unemployed although in this case it probably also includes a significant number of unemployed or underemployed people).
That’s changing now though and would be massively accelerated if we had PR. By all means lets have PR when the likes of Farage are a footnote in history but until then lets not give him/them what they want.
What the actual evidence from loads of countries including Scotland is that this is the exact opposite of what happens. Dazhs claim has zero validity. PR is essential to modernise the country and would push Farage back to the fringes not being accepted into the mainstream.
No I'm not going to get distracted into another pointless debate which considering the makeup of stw the outcome is obvious.
Or maybe you could start by explaining what he meant by ‘working people’.
Note that he actually said "working class people". Which doesn't make it better.
Loving the idea that 32% of the active electorate is composed of bearded geography lecturers and cloth cap-wearing wheeltappers fresh up from t’pit.
Well that's clearly bonkers, we all know it's Mondeo Man driving up and down the M6 that fills the gap between those extremes.
This is because they promote simplistic answers to complex problems.
Exactly.
I was pointing out the problem, the solutions anyone's guess.
Or maybe it’s because they speak in words that working people can understand and don’t display the superiority and snobbery that is a hallmark of many progressive liberals?
Personally, my hypothesis would be that all* politicians dumb it down for everyone because they have to. 99% of people aren't economics graduates, I did 2 modules of it at university as part of an Engineering Masters so at best I at least know I'm at the bottom of the Dunning Kruger curve on that one. If I sat down with Rishi or Jeremy Hunt they'd intellectually demolish me on the subject.
Whether that's Labour or the Tories trying to explain government finances and macroeconomics as if it's a debit account and the BoE is the loan shark, the fringes of the Conservative party trying to pin all problems on gender identities and immigrants, or Labour trying to wordsmith a call for a ceasefire that neither results in a ceasefire or cuts diplomatic ties with Israel or the entire Middle East. By the time whatever working group has finished it's deliberations it's always going to have to try and explain some incredibly complex issues in a very dumbed down way. Sometimes that's just a gross simplification, sometimes it's outright lies. And the trouble is, because we don't know what we don't know we often have to take it at face value.
*Competent politicians. Nadine Dorries doesn't count, or falls into the lying category.
However popular Donald Trump might be in the United States opinion polls show that he is deeply unpopular in the UK. And Trump certainly doesn’t get a sympathetic press here.
I reckon Farage’s political opponents should exploit his admiration and support for the convicted criminal as it is very current and easily proven.
The main parties can't do that. Because as unpalatable as it is to contemplate, Trump may be the next POTUS (god help us). In that case the UK govt of whatever flavour would have to form a working relationship of sorts with him.
He's a vindictive****er and would definitely bear a grudge if (for example) PM Starmer had called out Farage for being his arse licking, toadying, fanboi. However much he probably wants to.
'Spose the likes of the LDs, Greens etc. have less to lose and could get away with it.
Note that he actually said “working class people”. Which doesn’t make it better.
Had to go back and check and he said working people in the first paragraph and working class people in the second. Not sure that working class people is that much more descriptive than working people, tbh.
If you use the ONS system of A, B, C1, C2, D, and E and compare the voting patterns in the last election it's actually fairly evenly split across all 'classes'.
So it leaves the question, just who are these people we spend our days denigrating on here?
No I’m not going to get distracted into another pointless debate which considering the makeup of stw the outcome is obvious.
It would be interesting to hear what your criteria is to distinguish the Pointless STW Debates from the Worthwhile STW Debates.
This is because they promote simplistic answers to complex problems
It's funny because when we discuss complex problems regarding government finances I get told nobody wants to know about how things work.
It's too complex apparently.
But the Farage is too simple.
Mmmm.
Me thinks the debate level shifts depending on whether we're trying to shut a point of view down.
I think it's simply good to be informed and able to challenge stuff.
The main parties can’t do that. Because as unpalatable as it is to contemplate, Trump may be the next POTUS (god help us). In that case the UK govt of whatever flavour would have to form a working relationship of sorts with him.
That is a very fair point. But obviously the LibDems don't have to worry about that! Although granted Farage doesn't pose an electoral risk to the LibDems.
Trump did forgive Boris Johnson btw despite Johnson being quite rude once about him when Johnson was London mayor.
Btw Curtice (the pollster) is saying today that LibDem voters who had previously said that they would be backing Labour at the general election are now apparently starting to return back to the LibDems under the belief that the Tories cannot win.
He claims that both the Tories and Labour have lost support recently whilst Reform UK and the LibDems have increased theirs.
The point he is making is that the smaller parties are benefitting as voters become more convinced that Labour will win a landslide.
It’s funny because when we discuss complex problems regarding government finances I get told nobody wants to know about how things work.
It’s too complex apparently.
To be fair, I'm pretty sure I told you you were over-simplifying things on the MMT thread 😉
I don't think the issue is necessarily over-simplifying. It's over-simplifying by saying everything is the fault of already marginalised members of society.
The Muslim Vote is treating this election extremely seriously because of the current slaughter going on in Gaza, which western politicians are mostly either supporting or are fairly indifferent to.
Their strategy is clear – if you didn’t vote for a ceasefire we won’t be voting for you.
That plays incredibly well for the far right/Reform. Muslims voting as a block for an issue MP's have no real influence on. What will they want next?
It would be interesting to hear what your criteria is to distinguish the Pointless STW Debates from the Worthwhile STW Debates.
That sounds like another pointless debate.
But I will confess that I consider all political debates on stw to be pointless and inconsequential, some so much so that they aren't even worth the effort.
I guess that the only benefit they provide imo is that they help me to rationalise my own personal opinions in an orderly manner.
I was at a local trade union council meeting last night and I made a point from the floor which I had basically formulated on here.
And I do of course also learn stuff on here that I wouldn't otherwise know a great deal about, such as the mindset of middle-class centrists.
Yesterday I was interested to see that the whole general election thread seemed to be obsessed with private education, I didn't follow the debate as it's not something that I am particularly interested in but I did think "how very STW".
PR is essential to modernise the country and would push Farage back to the fringes not being accepted into the mainstream.
The far right populists are on the rise throughout Europe, and there is an increasing mainstreaming of the far right in the Western world. I'm a supporter of PR, but I do think that we need to be very very cautious about the rise of the far right populists and illiberal democracy.
That plays incredibly well for the far right/Reform. Muslims voting as a block for an issue MP’s have no real influence on. What will they want next?
Of course the far-right exploits the fact that Muslims vote for the things which concern them.
But I have no idea what you mean by an issue that MPs have no influence on. MPs can decide whether or not they back calling for Israel to stop the killing and implement a ceasefire. And MPs should be held accountable for their decisions, obviously.
I have heard Muslims say "I don't care about their other policies if they can't make a stand against genocide then I don't want them to represent me in parliament".
Which is actually my position too.
I’m a supporter of PR, but I do think that we need to be very very cautious about the rise of the far right populists and illiberal democracy.
I agree, but I think PR mitigates the risks the far-right poses to a FPTP democracy where once they go from having 20% support to 30% support they are suddenly running the country with no mechanism to keep them in check.
Even in Italy the Council of Ministers is still made up of 4 separate parties plus independents that limits the power somewhat, not to mention the fact they have three separate houses just in the legislative branch, plus the Executive branch, and judicial branch. Maybe that's not a good thing overall, but a full fascist takeover is less likely with that much distributed power.
The UK is in an incredibly precarious situation, or rather it will be in 5 years time.
'kinell, even the farmers are revolting!
Is this the right forum for a pointless debate?
No!
Yes
Somebody said it was!
Yeah but not too pointless please
I think PR mitigates the risks the far-right poses to a FPTP democracy where once they go from having 20% support to 30% support they are suddenly running the country with no mechanism to keep them in check.
There are very few constitutional safeguards here too: a party winning 30% of the vote could potentially seize control of many of the mechanisms of the state.
Once again the toxicity of the Corbyn years leaves Starmer hamstrung over the Israel/hamas war. The stench of antisemitism under Corbyn needed strong action, but left Starmer in a position where he was unable to criticise Israel, with the RW press just waiting to bring up his record as a defence lawyer in defending terror suspects and Corbyns Hamas links.
He was in opposition with no power to do anything, yet the blame gets laid at his door.
There are only 2 outcomes. Tory or non-Tory. Due to the ridiculous castigation/destruction of the LD post coalition, it’s Labour or bust.
The biggest enemy of the left is the left itself.
There are only 2 outcomes. Tory or non-ToryThe biggest enemy of the left is the left itself.
I would say the biggest enemy of the left is the Labour Party which of course used to be the left.
I didn’t follow the debate as it’s not something that I am particularly interested in but I did think “how very STW”.
So you came to your conclusion without bothering with any evidence, and made sure the rest of us are fully aware of your opinion on a subject you claim to not be interested in.
Now that's what I call Very STW.
made sure the rest of us are fully aware of your opinion on a subject you claim to not be interested in.
What are you talking about? I didn't express any opinion on the subject of private education at all.
Are you confusing me with someone else?
I know you can drop a postal vote off at the polling station on the day, for that last minute waverer
We often postal vote for local/GE. Previous years have dropped off on the day at the polling station. This year I had to fill a form in- first time ever had to do it. I wonder if it's linked to the ID requirement? They were a bit put out that I was also bringing my wife's envelopes & I had to explain why to the official in charge.
re the photo of Rishis & Meloni- she's laughing cos he's said "I'll see you at the next G7 summit"
What are you talking about? I didn’t express any opinion on the subject of private education at all.
Are you confusing me with someone else?
You said it was "very STW". I don't know what you mean by that but it certainly sounds like an opinion.
Oh okay
The debate gets dumbed down because for the most part, each party is fighting over the same floating voters in a few marginal seats, and that paucity of discussion harms outcomes for everyone. It comes back to making sure everyone has a say in who the government is.
Electoral reform people have loads of useful discussion on their website for folks who want/should find out more. That's quite a few of the commentators on this thread........
Yup TINAS, the Labour Party is now seen as a middle-class party, which is of course exactly what it is.
I’m the son of a professor (this man - https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/18487344.obituary-professor-bill-miller-peerless-analyst-won-respect-across-political-spectrum/ ). I have a comfortable, salaried, stable management job. I can afford a bit more tax and I believe in a centre left social democracy with the safety nets and ladders for those who didn’t start with my advantages.
Yes I’m middle class. Yes I vote Labour. Such is life.
I hope no one is suggesting that because I enjoy a little privilege I should find a more right wing party to support.
If there was private health care that cost £50 a month for the zip household I'd pay it.
Therefore I'd be happy to pay an extra £50 a month tax for a fully functioning NHS.
I hope no one is suggesting that because I enjoy a little privilege I should find a more right wing party to support.
I think the point TINAS was making is the Labour Party is perceived to be a middle-class party. I think that is exactly what it has become. Your example seems to strengthen that argument.
I am obviously not suggesting that you find a more right-wing party to support. I don't know why you are asking the question.
To be fair I didn’t think you were.
I think it is more that there are a lot of folk like me, we have to go somewhere, and if we are honest the middle class element of the Labour Party is not new. My father was a Fabian in the sixties. He introduced Robin Cook to the local meeting.
