NationStates Jolt Archive

This statement completely depends on your political view-point. I mean, if you think the class system justified and meritocratic you're going to disagree straight away, so this "essay" is directed more at my friends on the left and those floating voters. I could be accused of preaching to the converted. Secondly, I'm fully aware Labour doing relatively poorly in the Council Elections is not a sign of regime change.

Lest we forget the Tory rule of eighteen years, where Thatcher et al created an economy that shrank the middle class and expanded a disenfranchised working class; crushing - sometimes quite literally - the voice of Trade Unions.

Labour have genuinely improved Britain. Wales and Scotland have been given their own parliaments, allowing them to follow their traditional Labour roots even under Conservative governments, The New Deal has brought real unemployment in young people down something, Tax Credits have created a system that benefits all households; things that seemed inconceivable prior to 1997. And yet all this work seems to be overshadowed by three monstrously conservative policies: Foundation Hospitals, Top-Up Fees and, of course, Iraq.

However, are these policies warranting a change of government? For all its ills, New Labour is a beast tempered by a socialist core, Blairs position is no doubt weakened, so it will not be suprising to see a more inclusive style of government in the near future.

To lose Labour would be to lose reform of our political system, whatever you make think of him, whatever his motives, Blair is a proven - and required - reformist.

Let's hope we get a more proportional election system before it gets to the point where this government needs to be held accountable...

But there is a better alternative to both the unpleasantly capitalist and uncaring two main parties- the Lib Dems. I'm gonna join Charlies Army fo'sho'. Long Live the Liberal Revolution! Hasta la Liberalite siempre! Or something. I agree Labour are better than the Tories, but only in the way a rotting abcess is better than a brain tumour.

I was half tempted to include a footnote on the Lib Dems, but they've still got a long way to go. It definitely won't be the next general election that they are allowed a more significant voice, I could put money on it. I'm not a Labour supporter, in fact I vote Lib Dem but they just don't have the capacity and maybe they won't until we get PR.

The Tories, are, and were, pro middle class, Thatcher opened up the city of London the everyone of every class. She crushed the Unions because they were crushing us, and our economy. We had rediculous tax rates, and a laughable economy, and democracy at that.

In regards to the Parliaments, that has just caused one more layer of administration, and conflict over turf.

Labour don't even stand for election in my part of the UK, so the whole discussion is moot to me.

Labour don't even stand for election in my part of the UK, so the whole discussion is moot to me.

Where is that?

Labour don't even stand for election in my part of the UK, so the whole discussion is moot to me.

Where is that?

Northern Ireland.

Labour don't even stand for election in my part of the UK, so the whole discussion is moot to me.

Where is that?

Northern Ireland.

Ah.

Anyway like I said, there is very little point to the regional assemblies, it is just one more layer of administration and is likely to give more strength to the people who want Scotland etc, to be separate from England.

Labour has increased taxes to pay for more administrators, and hs brought through immoral proposal after immoral proposal.

My personal preference:

Liberal Democrats > Conservatives > New Labour

I would place every other political party between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives, with the exception of the BNP and UKIP, which go after New Labour.

I really do not care what some may argue New Labour has done for us. I see an insufferably smug political party getting too close to the Americans, destroying Britain's relationship with Europe, continuing on the path of privatisation, groping in the dark with its Energy White Paper, telling a thousand lies, and unlike the Tories, getting away with it, all the time acting all condescending because hey, they can control two thirds of parliament on much less than half that proportion of votes.

I am fed up with it. At least when the Conservatives screwed you, they were honest about it, and the lies they did tell, were patently obvious. At least it is clear that the Liberal Democrats have no coherent national policy. And what do we get from New Labour? The same right-wing free-market crap with a veneer of socialism, that people actually buy. Well good for those idiots. Me, I hate people trying to treat me as if I'm a gullible fool.

Northern Ireland.

Ah.

Anyway like I said, there is very little point to the regional assemblies, it is just one more layer of administration and is likely to give more strength to the people who want Scotland etc, to be separate from England.

I wasn't just refering to the currently suspended Northern Ireland Regional Assembly, but also to elections to parliament: not only do Labour not stand in Northern Ireland, but they also refuse to accept membership from individuals living in Northern Ireland.

Note - I'm not trying to derail this discussion, I just realised that having made my initial statement I needed to expand on it and clarify it. Having done so, I'm out of here...

I think it all boils down to two things.

The media and who controls that. The vast majority of the media is right-wing, our wonderfully impressionable public seem to be rather easily lead into a Murdoch-formulated opinion.

And second, but no less important, the fact that the House of Commons is so adversarial. We need consensus and we need PR.

Admittedly Devolution has been expensive, but I also believe that it has been worthwhile, it has allowed Wales and Scotland, particularly Scotland to express it's - dare I say it - socialist roots. As for unleashing nationalists, I'm yet to see anyone sing Land Of My Fathers outside of the Millenium Stadium since 1999, if anything it has curbed the voice of nationalism.

I believe that I may sound something like a Blairite, my support isn't blind, I just dislike the Right.

I think it all boils down to two things.

The media and who controls that. The vast majority of the media is right-wing, our wonderfully impressionable public seem to be rather easily lead into a Murdoch-formulated opinion.

And second, but no less important, the fact that the House of Commons is so adversarial. We need consensus and we need PR.

Admittedly Devolution has been expensive, but I also believe that it has been worthwhile, it has allowed Wales and Scotland, particularly Scotland to express it's - dare I say it - socialist roots. As for unleashing nationalists, I'm yet to see anyone sing Land Of My Fathers outside of the Millenium Stadium since 1999, if anything it has curbed the voice of nationalism.

I believe that I may sound something like a Blairite, my support isn't blind, I just dislike the Right.

Murdoch supports Blair.

TG: I would say they are socialist with a right wing facade. As they have bills like the Gender Recognition Bill going through, secretly.
The BBC are obviously socialist, for the most part.

The Devolution has caused conflict, and annoyance when the Scots etc, are allowed to vote in England only issues, have devolution if you desire but at least allow it to be a two way street.

TG: I would say they are socialist with a right wing facade. As they have bills like the Gender Recognition Bill going through, secretly.
If that is their idea of socialism, I want no part in it.

Hum lets see first a bit of a defence of the conservatives

Odd though this may sound disliking margret thatcher for destroying the trade unions is an odd idea.

Trade unions as we have them now are able just about to act as a counter balance for employee rights. Trade unions under her, were hugley powerfull organisation dicatating to people what they wanted to happen. This was all the more laughabale because most of them, say coal mining or steel where vastly inpractical anyway. As shown by thier rapid colapse.

We may now have far less manufactruing, but what we do make is up to world standards as opposed to the running joke that as brisith layland for example.

As for new labour, when they first came in i did'nt react that badly ok so i'm not a socilaist at heart, but they seemed to be saying interesting things.

Unfortunatly practice has not lived up to performance bosts, their undoutably have been some improvements. but in many areas their haven't. Look at health care which is turning into a reginally fractured mass, with to many managers. In public transport we have the amusing shenagans of privatised transport, ok so they did'nt start the process but they could try to fix it. We also have the amusing irony of a suposidly socalist goverment privatising lots of peices of the economy. I always find that odd, thing like the post offfice for example, are not economically viable, thier present to provide a service so will have to be kept. Oh and we have the interesting education policys such as no tuition fees and centrally controlled school time tables.

Actually their lies my objection to socalistic polocies isulatrated well by education, we have refrom of the university system, ok i can see some need for that, but to allow half of the population is seems odd. Now if this was achived by making the population more intellegent ok, but it hasn't it has been achived by making degree almost a luaghable qualification. thier is a difference between an elete and an exclusive elete that they have failed to recognise.

Oh and of course we have the spin culture, which has effect both labour and conservatives. And we have the anoyance of tony blair himself leading us into a war (not as much blaim to the party thier).

As for my own political veiws, as you might geuss I tend to vote either green on liberal.

You can defend labour they have done some good things, but they've made alot of mistakes as well, largely the idea that renaming something actually changes it (a common misconception)

But there is a better alternative to both the unpleasantly capitalist and uncaring two main parties- the Lib Dems. I'm gonna join Charlies Army fo'sho'. Long Live the Liberal Revolution! Hasta la Liberalite siempre! Or something. I agree Labour are better than the Tories, but only in the way a rotting abcess is better than a brain tumour.
Hey, brain tumors can be quite fun. Take it from me, as I've had one before.

Of course Murdoch supports Blair... It is Blair who acts upon the policy the Murdoch Public want. No use denying that, just look at it:
Increased spending on the NHS, reacted to in the 2001 Budget
Social Conservatism.

That's the problem with Modern British politics, The Parties havego to be in with Middle England and the readers of the Murdoch Press. Which takes me back to PR, we'd be much better off with it. Convited political parties such as the Greens and, though this is equally a reminder of the double edge of democracy, the BNP could attempt to lead opinion rather that follow blindly at a focus Groups Discretion.

As for the two way street of Devolution. I absolutely agree. If it wasn't for Scottish Labour MP's we wouldn't have top-up fees and foundation hospitals... Such is life. You may have noticed my democratic vein, I would be more than happy to see a two way street

Of course Murdoch supports Blair... It is Blair who acts upon the policy the Murdoch Public want. No use denying that, just look at it:
Increased spending on the NHS, reacted to in the 2001 Budget
Social Conservatism.

That's the problem with Modern British politics, The Parties havego to be in with Middle England and the readers of the Murdoch Press. Which takes me back to PR, we'd be much better off with it. Convited political parties such as the Greens and, though this is equally a reminder of the double edge of democracy, the BNP could attempt to lead opinion rather that follow blindly at a focus Groups Discretion.

As for the two way street of Devolution. I absolutely agree. If it wasn't for Scottish Labour MP's we wouldn't have top-up fees and foundation hospitals... Such is life. You may have noticed my democratic vein, I would be more than happy to see a two way street

many intrstin points here:-

the murdoc press, well sadly thier porbably little we can do about this one people will read what they want. twould be better allround if they read NEWS papers as opposed to OPINION papers but thier we go, somepeople always want to be told what to think.

As to PR it is undoutaely more demotratic, but it does have its own problems, one that it leads to slightly skaky goverments and secondly that it can lead to compromise answers where while a good compromise would'nt have been as effective as either extreme

On the scotish MP point yes some work is needed, the idea of having a british parlmient (that engalnd scotland and wales) does work. dut for it to work you would need an english parlmient as well. though sadly this would leed to yet more dueurocracys - sigh

I agree with Enerica. The new parliaments and assemblies just provide another layer of beauracracy, which we don't need.

Tactical, the closeness with the current American administration is worrying, though increased closeness with Europe is worrying also. We aren't really compatable with either. But the whole EU thing, well, it seems horribly overstated. For example, the pro-Europeans can sometimes bring up the "united Europe or a fragmented Europe." That without increased relations with Europe we will be left behind. This is clearly nonsense. Does Asia have the AU? Nope, and Japan is one of the most successful economies in the world (admittedly it is in a major major slump, but every nation has those.) I don't hate Europe. I just don't believe that we need to be formally linked to them. Consider the unlimited patenting law. Do you really want to be bound by this?

Also, if you grant the Scottish, the Welsh, and the Irish a seperate parliament, shouldn't you grant the English one? After all, Westminster is the British parliament, and the English are being left behind.

But, here's my political preference.

Tory>LibDem>lab.

The unions can't be allowed to be as powerful as they were during the Thatcher era. They had to be dealt with. Though, it's certainly true, New Labour is Old Conservatives.

Apologies for the random switching of subjects. It's just being written as I think it.

Nope, and Japan is one of the most successful economies in the world (admittedly it is in a major major slump, but every nation has those.)
Hey, Germany has the EU and it hails .2% growth as great. :wink:

As far as I am concerned I despise poor people, I think we should bring back the days when poor people were flogged in public. Thatcherism worked in general, she expanded the wealth gap (something we need to destroy the poor) and hated poor people. If you are a labourite piss off i dont want my parents to pay 3000+ pounds a year simply so your drugged up common children can enter an middle middle and upper middle class institution. Piss off back to mining is what I say!

I despise poor people. I depise the way the steal and do drugs and sometimes infiltrate middle class areas. I despise them.

As far as I am concerned I despise poor people, I think we should bring back the days when poor people were flogged in public. Thatcherism worked in general, she expanded the wealth gap (something we need to destroy the poor) and hated poor people. If you are a labourite piss off i dont want my parents to pay 3000+ pounds a year simply so your drugged up common children can enter an middle middle and upper middle class institution. Piss off back to mining is what I say!
Don't troll. You don't know what you're saying. You're just trying to get a reaction. That's what you always do. That's how you get your kicks. It's getting tiresome.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Nope, and Japan is one of the most successful economies in the world (admittedly it is in a major major slump, but every nation has those.)
Hey, Germany has the EU and it hails .2% growth as great. :wink:
Meh, it's hardly dirt poor, is it? Even 0% growth when you're rich is still wealth.