Militant students at Warwick

[MrGongGong]

You could also argue that the fact that Gove sends his children to a state school supports the point I was making - that whether MPs follow that example is less important than the educational policies they support and promote. Gove has arguably promoted some very divisive and regressive educational policies and certainly never had the slightest intention of doing anything about public schools.

I do agree about the charitable status issue - ending that loophole is I think Green party policy and really ought to be Labour policy.

I think that the "" around "State" says something.
Given that the vast majority of people involved in politics are (IMV) self serving and not to be trusted at all what they DO is often more important than what they SAY.

Gove has arguably promoted some very divisive and regressive educational policies

It's hardly "arguably" IMV

[aeolium]

Given that the vast majority of people involved in politics are (IMV) self serving and not to be trusted at all what they DO is often more important than what they SAY.

And for me what they do that affects millions of people is more important than what they do that doesn't.

[ahinton]

Now you're beginning to sound a lot like your forum admirer ...

The implication that he has but one is as gratuitous as it is patronising; once again, you do yourself no favours here.

[P. G. Tipps]

The implication that he has but one is as gratuitous as it is patronising; once again, you do yourself no favours here.

Ahinton, I am sure Mr Barrett is well capable of speaking for himself and has demonstrated that capability on many previous occasions on this forum. My observations are based on what I see and not what others tell me I should have seen, and I certainly do not post my views to do 'favours' for myself or anyone else here! If such forum simplicity is seen by others as 'gratuitous' and 'patronising' then that is indeed unfortunate, and I can only express my sympathy for those afflicted.

As for street-marches and demonstrations I still don't think these achieve very much apart from public disruption and damage to property and sometimes the person. Nothing that has been said here has really changed my mind on that, and I think organised 'rebellion' against authorised democratic Government, whilst normal in the student "growing-up" process, is not something that might be readily countenanced by the more mature and reasonable adult.

However, I feel sure you, and others here, may well not agree ... :-)

[Richard Barrett]

As for street-marches and demonstrations I still don't think these achieve very much apart from public disruption and damage to property and sometimes the person

How many have you been on?

[ahinton]

Ahinton, I am sure Mr Barrett is well capable of speaking for himself

Did I suggest otherwise in what you quote in your post or indeed anywhere else?

and has demonstrated that capability on many previous occasions on this forum.

Indeed - but what's that got to do with what you wrote, to whcih I took exception?

My observations are based on what I see and not what others tell me I should have seen, and I certainly do not post my views to do 'favours' for myself or anyone else here! If such forum simplicity is seen by others as 'gratuitous' and 'patronising' then that is indeed unfortunate, and I can only express my sympathy for those afflicted.

I was referring specifically to a sentence in one of your posts, not to your posting in more general terms; I'd have thought that this was obvious.

As for street-marches and demonstrations I still don't think these achieve very much apart from public disruption and damage to property and sometimes the person. Nothing that has been said here has really changed my mind on that, and I think organised 'rebellion' against authorised democratic Government, whilst normal in the student "growing-up" process, is not something that might be readily countenanced by the more mature and reasonable adult.

However, I feel sure you, and others here, may well not agree ... :-)

Never mind for the moment who might agree or disagree with you; I would ask you instead how you would seek to bring about change in cases when all other possibilities for that have been exhausted - and please don't give a knee-jerk General Election response, especially in a climate wherein the likelihood of any kind of majority government after next May is looking as remote as it already is.

[MrGongGong]

I think organised 'rebellion' against authorised democratic Government, whilst normal in the student "growing-up" process, is not something that might be readily countenanced by the more mature and reasonable adult.

And a Happy Christmas to you, i'm assuming you are using this thread as part of you getting into your character for the Dickensian play you are appearing in?
What utter utter nonsense

"authorised democratic Government" a bit of a joke isn't it?

People who go on about how people should "grow up" really need to take a look at themselves IMV

[Richard Barrett]

"authorised democratic Government" a bit of a joke isn't it?

Some figures: 45.5 million people were registered to vote, of whom 65% did. Of these, 36% voted Tory, or about 10.6 million people, less than a quarter of the electorate. And yet there's been a Tory government since 2010, albeit with some fairly ineffectual hangers-on. In what sense can this be called "authorised"?

People who go on about how people should "grow up" really need to take a look at themselves IMV

There's a lot of it around. It seems to go along with a conviction that only the middle-aged and older have anything useful to say about society, which is questionable to say the least.

[MrGongGong]

Some figures: 45.5 million people were registered to vote, of whom 65% did. Of these, 36% voted Tory, or about 10.6 million people, less than a quarter of the electorate. And yet there's been a Tory government since 2010, albeit with some fairly ineffectual hangers-on. In what sense can this be called "authorised"?

There's a lot of it around. It seems to go along with a conviction that only the middle-aged and older have anything useful to say about society, which is questionable to say the least.

Indeed, NOW stop messing around with funny noises and get a "proper job" (he said en route to the session where the plan is to compose a piece with 60 teenage musicians using oyster shells and organ pipes)

[french frank]

Some figures: 45.5 million people were registered to vote, of whom 65% did. Of these, 36% voted Tory, or about 10.6 million people, less than a quarter of the electorate. And yet there's been a Tory government since 2010, albeit with some fairly ineffectual hangers-on. In what sense can this be called "authorised"?

It's certainly authorised - without the need for quotation marks - because it went through the current constitutional processes.

That leaves plenty of other questions (why do we persist with FPTP, just because an "authorised" process was observed in a referendum? why does such a low percentage of the electorate bother to vote? ...). I ask them rhetorically, the answer to the second seems fairly obvious.

[MrGongGong]

It's certainly authorised - without the need for quotation marks - because it went through the current constitutional processes.

Surely the numbers indicate that the "authorisation" is of rather dubious validity?

As is the idea that it's somehow "democratic"

Maybe part of the problem is that the PGTipp's of the world are too willing to accept things the way they are?

[Richard Barrett]

because it went through the current constitutional processes

... to which the obvious answer is that if that process enables a government to take power with 23.4% of those registered to vote it needs to be replaced, or at least called something other than "democratic".

[Richard Barrett]

too willing to accept things the way they are

You'd think so, except "the way they are" is changing all the time. So it's usually something more like "the way I like to imagine that they were".

[french frank]

... to which the obvious answer is that if that process enables a government to take power with 23.4% of those registered to vote it needs to be replaced, or at least called something other than "democratic".

Yes.

[french frank]

Should be added that, by my arithmetic, even Attlee's 1945 government only had 35% of the electorate which won them a clear majority of 146. If you're talking about 'democracy' the same arguments apply - the electoral system is rotten. But even if we had had proportional representation in 2010, the result might have been the same: no way of guessing how 2nd and 3rd preferences might have changed the result.