Sometimes it’s easy to feel this way, but a Government elected by 43% of the population shouldn’t have 56% of the power. Also basically every other developed country has multiple elected bodies to act as a check/restriction on the executive, here 43% of the vote gets you complete unfiltered dictatorial style power for 5 years. Brexit is harder to defend, but in reality the referendum was fraudulent and Brexit as sold is a completely different concept to what has been delivered, many people were deliberately manipulated and misled into voting for something that doesn’t exist, which more than accounts for the piddly margin that got it over the line. So even though there are big problems in our society, I don’t think we quite deserve the ****e we are experiencing.
The first past the post voting system needs to be binned. Pretty much all of Europe has a form of proportional representation, which would be good for this country. The 57% that didn’t vote Tory, could at least have had some representation in the House of Commons, under PR, and could have blocked so many of the bad moves made by the dictators that have led the Tory party. We could have had Brexit but still been in the single market and customs union, so less damage done to the future of the country. Or even a second vote.
Can’t remember where, but I read a really good article about wasted votes under our FPTP system. It’s worth remembering that it’s not just losing votes that are wasted, but all the surplus winning votes too. If someone, of whatever party, wins a seat with a majority of 30,000, that means that 29,999 of those votes are wasted, as well as all the votes cast for the losing candidates. Under a decent PR system, those wasted votes could be used towards seats allotted on a national, rather than constituency basis. The important thing would be to ensure that people are voting for something, rather than just selecting the least-worst option.
An interesting piece on Keir Starmer https://rachaelswindon.blogspot.com...C0zBj6HNqE_3LhQWMMsltUWO5HFW6LqDbybhqXM-eqsHc
That is pretty much exactly how I feel about Keir Starmer, and as much as I hate this government, in some ways I despise Starmer and his cronies even more for the way they have destroyed what was a true peoples Labour party. This sums up Starmer perfectly .....
It’s not great having a bit of a wish-washy alternative. But I really do think in the big picture he has the potential to remove Johnson, as long as he engages with other opposition leaders which in the long run will be better for the country, even if we end up with a Blairite centrist government. As much as I admired Corbyn’s principles and dislike the completely ridiculous battering he took in the media, he along with the other opposition leaders at the time are responsible for enabling the most right wing peacetime U.K. government to emerge through sheer incompetence. Also backing May’s Government in activating Article 50, without demanding/scrutinising an outline of the Governments plans for Brexit negotiations is the most right wing act by a Labour opposition I can remember, they effectively wrote the Conservatives a blank cheque for Brexit. He clearly had great left wing principles and acted in the way he thought was best for the country, but that doesn’t count for much when you inadvertently facilitate a hard right transformation of the U.K.
Nah, not having that mate, sorry. I’m still undecided about Starmer, but he certainly isn’t Blair’s puppet, that’s offensive nonsense. That sort of factionalism only helps the Tories.
If you don’t vote you can’t expect representation We should adopt measures to increase the number that actually vote Unfortunately our system means the elected gov never wants to adopt anything that might improve the system as they think it might lose them the next election which they would win again under the existing system. If they were less confident they might do the right thing. Bit of a catch-22
This is probably the most depressing thing I will post for a long time: I so badly wanted Starmer to unite the Labour Party around a pro-European approach but it seems he has no intentions of doing this. Indeed, by whipping his MP’s to vote for the ****ty trade deal but promising to distance himself from the consequences of it he is showing a complete lack of leadership. Perhaps the nation needs a new party with a centre-left, pro-European agenda, because unfortunately it doesn’t look like Labour will be offering any such thing.
I still can’t work him out. I can, to a certain extent, understand why he would vote for the bad trade deal, simply because it is better than a no deal, but also to appease the people who switched to the Tories “To get Brexit done”. At the same time he MUST make it absolutely clear to those voters, and everyone else in the country that it IS a bad deal that could have been avoided and that the Tory party WILL be held responsible for the impact it has on people’s lives and the economy. Ruling out the EU, before the impact of Brexit is fully understood, is shortsighted, and seems to be aimed at getting the “red wall” back, but at what cost? How many Labour voters will move to a pro-EU party, at the next election, gifting another 5 years of misrule to the most unscrupulous and dangerous bunch of MPs this country has ever seen? I would like to think that in 3/4 years time, when the full impact of Brexit is known, that a return to the EU might become more acceptable to those who mistakenly voted Leave, and that Labour could be the party to take it on. If his manifesto also turns it’s back on socialist principles, then I could be looking for another party to vote for.
Fair enough Archers. The factionalism is already there in the Labour party, but I have too much respect for you to argue us up a blind alley. My point is that Starmer is a Technocrat and while he is different in some areas to Blair, he is also more interested in securing power than bringing about fundamental change to this country. Obviously if he should manage to become PM, his will be a very different government to the current collection of criminals and imbeciles, but it will never be a Labour government worthy of the name. It will be just more of the same old stuff where the rich become ever more wealthy, middle England can feel slightly more comfortable and the poor are perhaps given a few more morsels to give the appearance of a more balanced society. But it won't really be any better if you live on a day to day basis because the money still doesn't get to where it's really needed. The whole two party political system is a hopeless trap and it has to change, and there needs to be a radical movement to create a new system that can challenge and replace what we have. Politics in this country is broken beyond repair and there has to be change at some point or we will be forever trapped in dystopian world where the rich are served by the rest of us. We are heading that way at a fair old lick of speed and that has been vastly accelerated under this vile government.
Frankly, Labour needs to figure out whether it intends to orient around small-l labour or around the modern left, because those two things no longer overlap to the extent they once did. Corbyn spent far too much time trying to triangulate to hold old parts of the Labour coalition together with the new left, and the result was hopelessly incoherent. Starmer, as you suggest, really ought to be embracing Europe, because the people who will now and in the future vote Labour sure do, and most the people who have left the party are unlikely to come back no matter what he or anyone else says. Everything happening now in the UK's political realignment happened in the US about a decade ago...Labour really ought to mind how that went.
A new party like the SDLP, which split the left vote in the 80s and kept Labour out of power for a generation? No thanks. As for Europe, we're out mate. I don't like it any more than you do, but endlessly refighting a battle that's already been lost is the most futile thing imaginable.
