Democracy costs money. We can choose to pay for democracy, or we can choose to save money and have FPTP instead of democracy. We could save even more money and do away with elections altogether.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Democracy costs money. We can choose to pay for democracy, or we can choose to save money and have FPTP instead of democracy. We could save even more money and do away with elections altogether.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
And that's only part of it. Neither are ministers acting in the name of the crown democratic. Neither is the House of Lords as the upper chamber of parliament. Neither are Henry VIII powers. Neither is massive centralisation of control in Westminster. And so on. And the less said about FPTP, its encouragement of a simple binary split, its stifling of smaller parties, and the way in which it so often gives no representation of any sort to significant portions of the population (on both sides of the left/right divide), the better. No, I do not see the UK as an example of a modern democratic state.
Modron
Member
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 202
Some people might actually support that idea.
Whichever system you vote for, there will ultimately always be somebody at the top dictating what you do and how you do it.
'Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner' as James Bovard once said, and I agree that sometimes we don't always get what we want. The flip side is to look at how many countries are a two party, one party or even a no party state and to thank our lucky stars.
SMP is a system that lends itself to various curiosities. It generally stifles more than two parties or is otherwise minoritarian, not majoritarian. AV solves the latter problem. I think we have a majoritarian political culture in this country, to which SMP is well suited. It's actually superior at representing regional influences (see the SNP in Scotland). It only lends itself to two party systems where support is broadly spread with only variations in support for those parties. Italy used SMP for a while for 75% of its seats (90s) in order to reduce corruption and to consolidate the party system. It did the former to a certain extent (remembering that this is Italy after all, the results were not fantastic but better than beofre) but failed at the latter owing to regional alliances. If anything third parties became stronger and the party system even more fractured.
Where support is evenly split between many small parties they can be elected on a very small share of the vote indeed. I remember campaigning against the BNP in Stoke in my student days, despite seldom getting more than arouhnd 30% of the vote in most wards, they were the joint largest party on the council. I recall one race in Abbey Green (think it was) where they won with about 27% of the vote. They were not popular, but neither were the major parties. However many here hated the BNP far more than they hated the traditional parties put together. The council formed an unstable three way coalition be tween Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Eventually all out elections were held and things stabilised a bit. Had Stoke used a more proportional system, the party system would probably have been more workable.
I do not however think any electoral law covers every political set of circumstances, it must be a conscious choice based on the desired goals and existing realities for any political system.
Struner
Member
But that would mean political prisoners, so you get the cost of internment camps instead.
---Peter.
Basher
Member
- Joined
- 6 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 343
So Tusk has shown his true colours. Un-elected, over paid, spits his dummy out because he is now on his back foot and is not going to get his way.
Junker still not put right the low tax situation HE give the big international companies when he was in charge at Luxembourg. Another one who is Un-elected and tells us what we can have.
EU accounts NEVER been signed off as correct. Why do we want to be part of these toss pots?
Junker still not put right the low tax situation HE give the big international companies when he was in charge at Luxembourg. Another one who is Un-elected and tells us what we can have.
EU accounts NEVER been signed off as correct. Why do we want to be part of these toss pots?
NSEFAN
Established Member
He's not wrong, there is indeed a special place in hell for the likes of Cameron who set us on the path to leaving with absolutely no plan, which has proven to be a damned stupid thing to do. We have instead been the ones spitting out dummies over it, the EU has by comparison been fairly consistent on the options on offer to us. Those responsible for this mess will be largely unaffected by the outcome. Sod the rest of us, though.
thenorthern
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 May 2013
- Messages
- 4,714
Apparently Labour is facing a dramatic fall in its membership and Corbyn has been seen in a video from 2009 saying some anti-EU things. A lot of the new post-2015 Corbyn fans aren't happy about him being anti-EU. I don't see why anyone is surprised by this as its obvious that he is anti-EU not for the same reasons as Nigel Farage but the Corbyn ideology is incompatible with the EU.
EM2
Established Member
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Who selects the Prime Minister again?
EM2
Established Member
The Council that comprises the heads of state (or of government) of the member states of the EU? That Council?
He didn't seem to be spitting it out for very long, minutes later he was laughing with the Irish PM about how the British press was going to react. That's sounds more like someone who doesn't give a *** than someone who's complaining like a spoilt teenager, or a rees-mogg.
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
Better to destroy the EU than let the EU destroy Europe
Basher
Member
- Joined
- 6 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 343
MPs of the party, but they were elected by us the people
So you got the prime minister that leavers wanted then.
EM2
Established Member
So it's OK for elected MPs to select a Prime Minister, but not for those Prime Ministers to elect a Council President? That's logical
overthewater
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 9,123
Donald Tusk will also have special place in hell for his stuck up arrogant views, NO ONE involved with brexit will come out of this looking nice. Not the leaves, or the remains, tories, labour, lib dems, anyone. There has been no tolerant towards anyone holding different opinions, we have done no planning for the last 2 years which has also not helped.
VauxhallandI
Established Member
Without fail, every time, face palm.
Giugiaro
Established Member
Oh, and who by any chance composes the EU Council? Isn't it by the leaders and ministers of each EU state?
I wonder who chose THEM to be in the Council...
Modron
Member
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 202
Not a Labour fan/supporter, but why the heck did Labour/Momentum pick Jeremy Corbyn as their main man if they knew he was a life-long Europhobe?
Surely, if they seek to be the most progressive party in the HoC, they should have gone with a more modern/progressive candidate?
Quite. I'm a member of the Labour party, though I didn't vote for Jeremy Corbyn in either leadership contest in which he stood I suppose it was a case of he was the only candidate putting himself forward with views that roughly coincided with their own. All politics except dictatorship (and including most dictatorships as well to be fair) requires some degree of coalition building, where people with different interests and viewpoints find common ground. Of the radical statist left, he was the one that was available and able to rally suppport around himself.
I don't like some of Corbyn's policies and have seriously considered leaving the party if only there were a better one to go to. I also think he has made a few key strategic blunders, but even as a Corbyn detractor, I would still vote Labour as they are for one thing my party and for another thing the 'least bad option'. That may or may not change depending on what moves my former MP, the member for Nottingham East makes or is able to make.
As an aside, there are some very progressive reasons for leaving the EU. It's just that this is not what is being sought.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Europe probably wasn't an overwhelming issue in most people's minds back in 2015 when Corbyn was first elected.
Modron
Member
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 202
Perhaps not, but the first cracks were appearing with UKIP's success in the European Parliament Elections back in 2014.
bramling
Veteran Member
I think Labour went through the same process which the Conservatives did post 1997 - a shift towards their own comfort zone, rather than a post-mortem examination into the electoral loss. For the Conservatives this was a lurch to the right under William Hague.
Meanwhile, well done to the rather creepy and sinister Tusk for reminding the British people why we voted to leave. All this just makes no deal more likely to be further embraced by people. Tusk might have just guaranteed leave will win any future referendum.
Last edited:
- Status