Take another look at Labour? You havin' a laugh!!!

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

Next Government?

tory bastards

 

[KelseyGrammer-Beast-SuitsBlue]

Labour lustre.

 

[coyney]

VOTE LABOUR, VOTE WELSH LABOUR! Lets face it, a vote against labour is a vote for the conservative's! FACT!

and that is the only reason I can find to vote labour

 

[Cena]

No matter how bad Labour get, I will always vote them. Labour at their worst is better then any ConMerchant Goverment, FACHT.

This is stunningly true!

 

[Bruce Wayne]

What's this about the Tory media Dave? I somehow doubt the proles that vote Labour ever read the Telegraph do you?

That's probably a generalisation on a par with this class war Billingdon crap that gets wheeled out. We want to be careful or we'll end up like America where Dem/Rep hate each other so much that nothing ever gets done.

 

[davek]

What's this about the Tory media Dave? I somehow doubt the proles that vote Labour ever read the Telegraph do you?

Nice.

It might interest you to know that some of us proles can read these days.

That's probably a generalisation on a par with this class war Billingdon crap that gets wheeled out. We want to be careful or we'll end up like America where Dem/Rep hate each other so much that nothing ever gets done.

You jest, surely, if you dont concede that the whole of the print media barring The Mirror, Guardian and Independent (the last two hardly 'Brownite', by the way) aren't all firmly in the Tory corner. That's just a ridiculous position to hold.

And remember when you watch the BBC News coverage of the parties that their political editor, Nick Robinson, is a former National Chairman of the Young Conservatives....

....and that his number two, James Landale...

...is a former Old Etonian mate of Boris Johnson and David Cameron.

 

[Robert Jarvis]

Take another look at Labour.

I did and Aaaaaaarrrrggggghhhhhhh.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Nice.

It might interest you to know that some of us proles can read these days.



You jest, surely, if you dont concede that the whole of the print media barring The Mirror, Guardian and Independent (the last two hardly 'Brownite', by the way) aren't all firmly in the Tory corner. That's just a ridiculous position to hold.

And remember when you watch the BBC News coverage of the parties that their political editor, Nick Robinson, is a former National Chairman of the Young Conservatives....

I do indeed jest. The whole idea of a swing voter is out dated (indeed the Bagehot column in the Economist this week discusses just that). I used the example of America because they are increasingly polarised and partisan, and as a result their political system has ground to a halt, with Republicans blocking anything the Democrats try to do.

You only have to see debates on here to appreciate how people are increasingly unwilling to shift their views, regardless of any evidence put before them. It seems unlikely that a newspaper article will change peoples minds, especially when said newspapers are already tainted by a perceived political bias.

What does rankle me however is the continued concentration on class in any political debate. It seems a peculiarly British thing to do. I dare say many of the Labour front bench were privately educated and it seems a bizarre suggestion that any top level politician is in touch with the common man, regardless of their educational background. They're all as bad as each other in this regard, as the expenses nonsense has shown. Career politicians most of them.

Sadly the concentration on party war means no one looks to see if the whole thing could not be done that much better. Everyone gets bogged down with partisan divides and the political system stumbles from one cock up to the next.

 

[Whitebootman]

I do indeed jest. The whole idea of a swing voter is out dated (indeed the Bagehot column in the Economist this week discusses just that). I used the example of America because they are increasingly polarised and partisan, and as a result their political system has ground to a halt, with Republicans blocking anything the Democrats try to do.

You only have to see debates on here to appreciate how people are increasingly unwilling to shift their views, regardless of any evidence put before them. It seems unlikely that a newspaper article will change peoples minds, especially when said newspapers are already tainted by a perceived political bias.

What does rankle me however is the continued concentration on class in any political debate. It seems a peculiarly British thing to do. I dare say many of the Labour front bench were privately educated and it seems a bizarre suggestion that any top level politician is in touch with the common man, regardless of their educational background. They're all as bad as each other in this regard, as the expenses nonsense has shown. Career politicians most of them.

Sadly the concentration on party war means no one looks to see if the whole thing could not be done that much better. Everyone gets bogged down with partisan divides and the political system stumbles from one cock up to the next.

This is the worst part of what our political system has become and the reason why many of us cannot be bothered to vote anymore. Too many politicians are just too concerened with not rocking the gravey train.

*official entry to worst mixed metaphor championship.

 

[davek]

I do indeed jest. The whole idea of a swing voter is out dated (indeed the Bagehot column in the Economist this week discusses just that). I used the example of America because they are increasingly polarised and partisan, and as a result their political system has ground to a halt, with Republicans blocking anything the Democrats try to do.

You only have to see debates on here to appreciate how people are increasingly unwilling to shift their views, regardless of any evidence put before them. It seems unlikely that a newspaper article will change peoples minds, especially when said newspapers are already tainted by a perceived political bias.

What does rankle me however is the continued concentration on class in any political debate. It seems a peculiarly British thing to do. I dare say many of the Labour front bench were privately educated and it seems a bizarre suggestion that any top level politician is in touch with the common man, regardless of their educational background. They're all as bad as each other in this regard, as the expenses nonsense has shown. Career politicians most of them.

Sadly the concentration on party war means no one looks to see if the whole thing could not be done that much better. Everyone gets bogged down with partisan divides and the political system stumbles from one cock up to the next.

All that's a bit happy clappy. Politics is a ferocious business. To expect non-partisan common ground to be thrashed out is fantasy. And no matter how far Labour have strayed away from core values over the past decade and a bit they still represent a better bet for anyone from a social class background that isn't obscenely privileged. Class is part of the fabric of our politics.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

That is exactly why politics does not work.

 

[davek]

That is exactly why politics does not work.

Politics works. You cant just have a strong civil society. The modern state is far too mammoth for that. In the absence of Shangri-La we just have to get on with political parties pulling the levers of our lives.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'll remind you of that when the Tories get in this summer.

 

[davek]

I'll remind you of that when the Tories get in this summer.

I wont like it, but I'll accept it. The emphasis is on you to tell us what we replace political parties with.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

As I've said a few times before, I would like government to be very small. Society needs various social technologies to prosper, ie things like law and order. The state can provide those. It doesn't need to provide health, education, charity etc.

It's a basic rule of complex systems that they function much better when ordered from the bottom up than from the top down.

Problems come in society when power is concentrated in the hands of the few. Politics is living proof of this as every party descends into sleaze and corruption once in power. There's no choice. In pretty much every walk of life we have abundant choice, yet in our choice of government we have two, and even then the choice is only offered every four years, and only then if our view coincides with the majority of others that vote.

It's a well trodden path in other intellectual areas, not least economics and computer science, but is also something explored politically by people such as Karl Popper and FA Hayek. They'll no doubt talk about it all far better than I could so they're probably a good place to start if you want to understand what I think government should/should not do.