OT - Über's Open Debate Thread

Good topic, Stan. I think it was The Proclaimers who sang "what do you do when democracy fails you?" albeit about Scottish independence (which we've done).

I thought that before I answered I'd look up a definition of 'democracy'. This is what I found: "a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives". And, in my view, therein lies the problem today. Elected Representatives. Who can honestly say that they have an opportunity today to exercise their vote in favour of somebody they feel truly represents them? I certainly cannot. At best, I think we have tended to vote for the least worst candidate (or party) rather than anyone whose vision resonates with us.

But I also think that this tendency is diminishing and is being replaced by the dreaded voter apathy. I often struggle to understand why the three main political parties talk a lot about improving turnout and addressing voter apathy. I would have thought that they'd prefer the current status quo, believing it is the low turnout that keeps them in or around office. Perhaps the 60% (or whatever) that don't turn out don't turn out because they don't want to vote Liberal, Labour or Conservative? That would be something for Messrs Clegg, Miliband and Cameron to fear!

I heard some time ago that membership of political parties had fallen considerably and continues to decrease. Many people, particularly the young, are now more likely, I gather, to align themselves to a protest group than join a party. Perhaps this is the real reason for their concern over voter apathy; it's not the turnout at the polling stations, but the falling membership revenues and party sponsorships. It therefore follows as little surprise that there is often talk of the main parties taking their fundraising out of the state coffers, i.e. make us pay for them out of tax revenues, rather than from donation.

The 'rational ignorance' theory is interesting. I feel it touches a little on Victor Vroom's theories on motivation (I think my post #552?) whereby the value the voter attributes to the knowledge he'd gain from educating himself on the relative merits of the candidates, and indeed voting for one of the blighters, is far outweighed by the extent to which he cannot be arsed. But I also feel there are educated voters like (I would flatter) myself that really cannot see daylight between the three main parties; and then it comes down to whether there's another candidate that better represents what is important to me, or if I vote least-worst, or if I don't vote at all.

I have reached the conclusion that the only way to dismantle the existing oligopoly is for apathetic voters to turnout, but to cast their votes for the local-issue candidate or, if there isn't one, a smaller minority party such as the Greens, UKIP or whatever (although not one of the extremist parties - some wag will point out that UKIP is an extremist party, no doubt). It is only after we turf out the fat, lazy, institutionalised career politicians - particularly those that have never done a proper job in their lives - that we will get the politicians we deserve.

 

Good points, Stroller.

http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/turnout.htm

What do you think has been the reason for the improved turnouts in 2005 and again in 2010?

I think it is generally true that oppositions don't win general elections, but that governments lose them. After 18 years of Conservative government between 1979 and 1981, I believe it was the Conservatives that finally lost power rather than Labour winning it. It is interesting that Labour then held on for 13 years with the lowest turnouts since the end of WWII. Hardly a mandate. Could it be that disillusioned and disenchanted conservatives couldn't bring themselves to keep their party of choice in power any longer in 1997, but that the Labour vote generally held? I think perhaps so.

The next GE will be fascinating, particularly the 12 months running up to it, where we'll see lots of pretend in-fighting within the coalition as both parties try to differentiate themselves from those with whom they've shared both power and (largely) opinion since 2010.

 

Turnout in 2001 was so low that it was almost inevitable that there would be subsequent increases. As I said, people were still generally satisfied with Blair pre-Iraq 2. Labour supporters had a Labour government - in name at least - and the Tories could see that Blair wasn't really a threat to them. The next GE will be interesting indeed with the coalition partners knifing each other and Miliband having moved Labour more to the left. The hysterical reaction to his energy price freeze proposal indicates that it could get quite polarised and get people out to vote.

 

Back to football for a mo. Joe Kinnear tried to sign his own player:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs...elder-already-played-newcastle-082038210.html

 

I suppose you're right in that being 'generally satisfied with Blair', as far as traditional conservative voters were concerned, also equated to their sense that his re-election was inevitable. Some voters seem (to me) to be a little like lambs in that they want to always vote for the winner, or at least not feel they've voted for the loser. When the trend towards change becomes more obvious is when many people become re-motivated to exercise their right to vote. When a particular party seems pretty solidly in power is when they seem to stay away in droves. At least that's how it seems to have been these last 16 years.

What's your prediction for the next GE, Stroller? Do you see Miliband triumphing because both the Nambies and the Conservatives are now tarred with the same brush? Personally, I can see it running very close again and would not be surprised to see another hung parliament.

I'd sooner they were all cast out.

 

ukip and tories
if they don't work together they might as well give up any hope of change(however small it might turn out to be)in europe

 

Can't argue with much of that Dave. Good post.

 

In this day and age we have in England an entire generation who could never be arsed to vote or understand anything about politics

I have overheard in the past the youth on my train to work discussing how the Queen keeps getting in every year and one girl thought the Queen was married to the PM !

The masses will always be controlled with toys from the powers eg mobile phones etc

I would love to see voting made digital and enforced ... The data is there
ID cards also but we can't even afford the set up costs!
I believe in an system like that then you may get younger brighter and fitter minds form younger parties

The youth loves gangs and parties yet a massive percentage of politicians come from the big private schools who are in effect their own gangs

The system currently breeds a small elite gang of knobs who are completely divorced from modern living and culture ... No wonder they haven't a clue on how to address the very basic of problems

ID cards and tech with fines if you details lapse or are not up to date issued at 16 for life ... Linked in with everything from a driving licence to exam results and travel docs ... Only cheats or fraudsters would need to worry ... No card? .. **** off and sort it. Temp permits for visitors to the UK

Regular requirements to check your ID through the tills of shops/ online/ Heath services like a boarding pass in a duty free


It may restore the pride if Bitish people and give us back worth

Data protection etc **** off private banks and credit companies are doing that now ... You have to be checked to see if you have money or want money so what's the difference?

How many junk email did you get today? Trying to sell and make money

The secure tech is already here use it I say

Then just live your life

 

I think that the next election will be close again, Uber. I would like to see Miliband give us a real choice by proposing re-nationalisation of the utilities and railways. That would get people exercised.

As to the rational ignorance theory, I don't understand how people could go through their lives without forming some kind of opinion as to which of the political parties best represents their views. It doesn't need to take a lot of research. Of course, many may decide that they're all a bad as each other, and they can't be arsed to vote. Perhaps they should be compelled?

 

if people are forced to vote the next prime minister will be from the monster raving loony party

 

We dig some big **** off holes to bury our rubbish ... build some bigger ones In Norwich, Hull, Avonmouth, Essex, Kent any disused coal mines and any other suggestions and put some big **** off national run Nuclear energy plants underground so our fuel prices cost nearly nothing. ...

 

Nice one Dave. I have similar rose tinted glasses for Italy, even though I'm well aware of all of its problems and irritations. I do think they have a better sense of quality of life than us, its much more social. Good and bad everywhere, trick is to enjoy the good and box the bad. I'm sure I'm more critical of England than other places precisely because it is 'my' country. I hope to end up a few months on the road every year with perhaps a tiny flat in London and a tiny place in an Italian hill town as 'home'. Really looking forward to 'dematerialising', getting rid of stuff.

As for patriotism, I'm English (mostly) but struggle to feel either pride or shame in that - it's an accident of birth. I have contributed nothing to the 'achievements' of this country, I don't feel responsible for our crimes, current or historic, but if someone is having a go I'll usually stand up for us because every tribe has a pile of crap at the back of its cave. Sometimes its fun to support an "England" sports team - football, rugby, cricket - because competition is more fun when you take sides. But they don't 'represent' me any more than the government or my MP does.

Of course, as discussed earlier in this thread, I still wish I had been born a Victorian gentleman.

 

Its not about motivation or understanding the issues Stroller. The 'theory' just states that it is rationally a waste of time engaging because your individual vote makes no difference. I just find it intriguing.

Regarding a political party 'best representing my views' I have always struggled with this. I don't have a ideology, I tend cover a wide span of 'political' positions on different issues. No party represents me, and frankly I have other things to do rather than represent myself. So its always a least worst choice between individuals many of whom I have a visceral dislike of as human beings (totally with Gore Vidal and Groucho Marx on this). All I hope is that we do get politicians who are driven by self interest rather than ideology, because they are likely to be more flexible issue by issue. I still vote and always feel dirty afterwards.

 

Rational ignorance occurs when the cost of educating oneself on an issue exceeds the potential benefit that the knowledge would provide.

I agree that it's an intriguing theory Stan, but I just don't think it should be applied to voting. The fact that an individual vote makes virtually no difference is not a reason not to take part, in my opinion. There are various forms of proportional representation that could mitigate this problem.

Unfortunately none of us is likely to find a single party that accurately represents us on all issues, so it can be a case of 'least worst' as you say. I believe that there should be wider use of referenda to deal with major issues where the parties themselves are split.

I am suprised that you would like us to have politicians motivated by self interest, wouldn't the public interest be preferable?

 

Its a pity Queens and Oddball feel that way. I don't know how any Englishman could not be proud of his Country. Okay, she might have done some bad things in times past but every Country has made mistakes. England has a history and culture unparalleled for a Nation of her size and continues to make positive contributions to Europe and the World.

That's why I hope she (and the rest of the UK) doesn't bail out of Europe but that's a different debate!

 

You think that's bad? I talked to a 20 year old girl who thought Hitler was still alive!

 

It's easy you live in a lovely beautiful country with nice people who talk to you ... come and live in the busy South East for a while ... it wouldn't take long for you to see the pitfalls and that is from a bloke who doesn't believe in the grass is greener on the other side ... we are where we are and can only be in the now.

I have said before i cold make a massive list of things I am proud about being English and I truly am but lifestyles for many are not as good for them as it maybe for me... lots has been lost forever: repsect, standards etc etc ... what is left ... social patterns and zombies who do not even know they are sick

 

Yeah, he shops at Asda in Cambridge, doesn't he?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24818743

...but would you vote for him?

 

Correctamundo Herr Uber!