I don't disagree with any of that. This is a government that has plumbed depths of dishonesty, corruption etc which a totalitarian state might be proud of. As I have only recently returned to the board and unusually had a look at the Politics thread I just was surprised that not a single Tory wanted to have a word. As you say, postings here do not seem extreme or untrue and nobody is asking for balance but I personally always enjoy a political debate where both sides contribute. This is just not that - which is of course fine as its nature is determined by whoever wishes to post.
There are a few problems preventing that open debate: 1. Politics in general has become so polarised as a result of 12 years of this extreme Governance and 6 years of Brexit (lies and realities) 2. Social media platforms in general 'open' debate, but then get corrupted by malign influencers - so many retrench into conversations with more like-minded people: and the Echo Chamber rules! 3. From my position.... There is now no chance of 'debating' Brexit for example, as everyone - Right, Left & Centre - knows it was and is a complete disaster but noone who promoted it will accept they were wrong and discuss how the UK can move forward.
I don't think politics is polarised enough. Labour, Liberal, Conservative and the SNP all adhere to neo liberalism the main reason for the growing inequalities in the UK and the cause of the rise of populism.
I think that the window was a little larger. You basically have to appease a bunch of dodgy, tax-dodging crooks now to have a voice. The media is overwhelmingly right-wing and utterly full of blatant, unadulterated lies.
On the other hand The Guardian has gone from a readership of a couple hundred thousand to millions online. BUT! even the Guardian has conformed to establishment values, despite having writers who don't. Other than that, we have always had a right dominated press full of lies. A good description of England.
The Guardian is pretty centre-left, despite what some people would have everyone believe. They print/post a bunch of stuff that's out of sync with their overall philosophy, though. It's generally fairly whacko opinion pieces, which people use to slag it off. Other than that there's the Mirror and that's about it, unfortunately.
Fair point, although it's difficult to know exactly what the 'opposition' Parties policies will actually be when/if they ever get into Government and they can hardly be blamed for the last decades deterioration I guess...
From 1979 there has only been one agenda and both major parties have followed it. We are only just beginning to see this system being seriously challenged because only those over 50 have ever known anything different.
I don't think that both parties are the same, though. They definitely share some aspects, but that's largely down to the FPTP system. You have to be pretty mainstream to win and what's mainstream is dictated by the media. Switching to a multi-party system may help, but that remains to be seen. It works elsewhere.
You only have to look at what happened to Corbyn when an agenda was put forward that WAS different. Yes Corbyn was a weak leader but he was trying to introduce a difference and a proper left agenda. We have a similar but opposite situation in Scotland where SNP membership is far more radicle then the top table but the leadership tries to appeal to all with what amount to some very conservative financial policies. FPTP is a system to support the status quo. The Liberals should never be forgiven for forsaking the chance to adopt it, opting instead for a cheap way to get into government and losing sight of their long held aspiration. Mugs! NB: The Liberals sabotaged the chance for proportional voting system. I should have said.
Corbyn's issue wasn't his policies though, in my opinion. He carried too much baggage, failed to see the bigger picture on a lot of issues and made stupid mistakes. He's continued to do so since leaving the Labour leadership, as have some of his closest allies. Perhaps it's to do with how long he's been in politics? He seems to have no idea about optics, though. His actual policies were quite popular on a large range of issues. He became utterly toxic as a public figure for other reasons.
I don't blame the LibDems - except for being stupidly naive. They saw an opportunity to get a taste of power for the first time in a century and with it they thought they could get PR. It was the Tories who totally f***ed them getting them to agree to policies they were against in order to get that PR and then the Tories truly shafted them on that. We had a vague glimmer of a chance of an electoral system that does not allow a 40% minority to put in extreme and radical policies. Was it worth that gamble - hindsight says no but we all do better with the benefit of hindsight. It has to go down as one of the cleverest pieces of political sabotage ever.
