Is tripartisanship over the SNP's bid to retain the £ bullying?

[Flosshilde]

I think you (like most politicians and those involved in parties) miss the point completely

No, I don't. I think you do. Try mixing with people who are over twenty for a change (& I don't care if that does sound, or is, patronising).

People are fed up with the WHOLE THING
it doesn't work
There really is no point in voting because the system has evolved in such a way that only people with a particular world view will ever get elected. THAT'S what so many people are pissed off about.

People are fed up with the whole charade because they can see it for what it is.

Given that's what we've got at the moment (and are likely to have for some time to come) abandoning it isn't going to change or improve it - just make it worse.

In my experience the people who are trying to improve things are more likely to grow wings and fly than get involved in a political party.

I think your experience is very limited. See my first comment.

[MrGongGong]

No, I don't. I think you do. Try mixing with people who are over twenty for a change (& I don't care if that does sound, or is, patronising).
I think your experience is very limited. See my first comment.

My response is probably too rude to print
You know absolutely nothing about who I mix with
and don't patronise me

I would politely suggest that it's YOU who seems to have the very limited experience
you really do miss the point completely

[french frank]

There really is no point in voting because the system has evolved in such a way that only people with a particular world view will ever get elected.

[...]

People are fed up with the whole charade because they can see it for what it is.

But they do vote, don't they? Turnout has dropped 8% since 1945, but 65% still bother to vote (up 6% since 2001).

The number of people who do actually vote when the general election occurs is higher than those who say they 'definitely' will
vote, so you're perhaps talking to the people who don't do as they say.

[MrGongGong]

But they do vote, don't they? Turnout has dropped 8% since 1945, but 65% still bother to vote (up 6% since 2001).

The number of people who do actually vote when the general election occurs is higher than those who say they 'definitely' will
vote, so you're perhaps talking to the people who don't do as they say.

hummmm
I wonder how many with bother next time ?
Party politics is a bit of an irrelevant piece of theatre
(but don't you just love Ionesco :-) )

[Serial_Apologist]

But they do vote, don't they? Turnout has dropped 8% since 1945, but 65% still bother to vote (up 6% since 2001).

The number of people who do actually vote when the general election occurs is higher than those who say they 'definitely' will
vote, so you're perhaps talking to the people who don't do as they say.

I would say to MrGG what I would say to anyone: one should not throw away a right that was fought long and hard for against the capitalist class; the right to vote was once the right of only a privileged few. Bourgeois democracy may be a sham, but the collective psychological draw of institutions that are difficult to disentangle in a complex modern society (for example the reality that both the police and the NHS are part of the same state that upholds domination by the rich) means that the masses will have to go through the disillusionment of discovering this for themselves before building something better and more accountable out of it. I still feel no other alternative to capitalism has yet been posed than socialism, because even environmentalism has to deal with who controls the resources that capitalism wastes day in, day out as part of its normal modus vivendi.

I myself got involved in the Labour Party in the 1980s because I saw it as the only available vehicle for progressive change in this country. Not that I thought socialism would come about solely though its electoralism, but the far left groups I'd been involved with up to that time (early 1980s) carried too much unsorted ideological baggage ever to appeal to middle and lower earners, and the best thinkers including EP Thompson had made their temporary homes in there.

If you're not happy with anyone standing, my recommendation is always vote for the least worst option on the voting list.

[Flosshilde]

My response is probably too rude to print

Judging by some of your past posts, I don't doubt it

You know absolutely nothing about who I mix with
and don't patronise me

You keep telling us who you mix with (predominately teenagers & students), so I do have some idea.

It wasn't you I was patronising.

I would politely suggest that it's YOU who seems to have the very limited experience

As I haven't said anything in any post about who I mix with you can't possibly know.

[Serial_Apologist]

Agreed - but in its way so does the 'voting doesn't change anything but opening a soup kitchen/camping outside St Paul's Cathedral does' idea. They have to be part of a larger whole. In its way the hard slog of lobbying & campaigning with parliament & MPs etc that does change things.

Extra-parliamentary action doesn't guarantee change, true; what I am suggesting is a combination of activism within and outside the existing institutions to democratise both, each reinforcing the other.

[MrGongGong]

I would say to MrGG what I would say to anyone: one should not throw away a right that was fought long and hard for against the capitalist class; the right to vote was once the right of only a privileged few. Bourgeois democracy may be a sham, but the collective psychological draw of institutions that are difficult to disentangle in a complex modern society (for example the reality that both the police and the NHS are part of the same state that upholds domination by the rich) means that the masses will have to go through the disillusionment of discovering this for themselves before building something better and more accountable out of it. I still feel no other alternative to capitalism has yet been posed than socialism, because even environmentalism has to deal with who controls the resources that capitalism wastes day in, day out as part of its normal modus vivendi.

I myself got involved in the Labour Party in the 1980s because I saw it as the only available vehicle for progressive change in this country. Not that I thought socialism would come about solely though its electoralism, but the far left groups I'd been involved with up to that time (early 1980s) carried too much unsorted ideological baggage ever to appeal to middle and lower earners, and the best thinkers including EP Thompson had made their temporary homes in there.

If you're not happy with anyone standing, my recommendation is always vote for the least worst option on the voting list.

This is a good point
BUT what does one do with a "right" that has become meaningless?

and

In its way the hard slog of lobbying & campaigning with parliament & MPs etc that does change things.

Many people of ALL ages (myself included) simply don't believe this anymore..... Iraq war ?

[Flosshilde]

The invasion of Iraq was a very particular case; in other cases (eg the gay age of consent, equal marriage, foe example) it was lobbying that brought these about.

& I think that the level of protests over Iraq did change things - Parliament now has to give its approval, & PMs are much less likely to enter into such campaigns.

[MrGongGong]

& I think that the level of protests over Iraq did change things - Parliament now has to give its approval, & PMs are much less likely to enter into such campaigns.

Im not sure about that
Parliament is full of people who all share the same world view in terms of the relative importance of economics, well being, ethics, business and so on. The fact that a load of people who all share the belief that it's ok to dispense with ethics if it's economically prudent to do so are going to approve of disapprove of these things hardly fills me with confidence.

It's a bit like music teaching IMV
The way in which education (and in particular arts education) is regarded by those in power hardly makes it an attractive career choice for the most imaginative and enthusiastic musicians. (which, of course, is not to say that that there aren't enthusiastic and imaginative people in music teaching)....

Are the most imaginative, inspirational and enthusiastic people likely to get involved in politics ?
I suspect not.

[Serial_Apologist]

Are the most imaginative, inspirational and enthusiastic people likely to get involved in politics ?
I suspect not.

I always found Caroline Lucas inspirational and charismatic, and her Aussie successor leading the Greens is getting stuck in.

[MrGongGong]

I always found Caroline Lucas inspirational and charismatic, and her Aussie successor leading the Greens is getting stuck in.

True
though you could probably count them on one had ;-)

[Serial_Apologist]

True
though you could probably count them on one had ;-)

Yes but remember they had to adjust their protocols for dealing with "the press" because, before that, they didn't have "leaders" as such, only spokespersons - an incomprehensible concept, apparently. There has to be SOMEONE in charge! <doh!>

[MrGongGong]

Yes but remember they had to adjust their protocols for dealing with "the press" because, before that, they didn't have "leaders" as such, only spokespersons - an incomprehensible concept, apparently. There has to be SOMEONE in charge! <doh!>

Which kind of makes a crucial point IMV
only those who organise themselves into groups with a single leader stand any chance of having a say
contrast that with other ways of doing things

CERN, Loose Tubes, Most string quartets etc etc etc all seem to function perfectly well without some megalomaniacal idiot in charge (and there are many other examples)

[aeolium]

I would say to MrGG what I would say to anyone: one should not throw away a right that was fought long and hard for against the capitalist class; the right to vote was once the right of only a privileged few. Bourgeois democracy may be a sham, but the collective psychological draw of institutions that are difficult to disentangle in a complex modern society (for example the reality that both the police and the NHS are part of the same state that upholds domination by the rich) means that the masses will have to go through the disillusionment of discovering this for themselves before building something better and more accountable out of it. I still feel no other alternative to capitalism has yet been posed than socialism, because even environmentalism has to deal with who controls the resources that capitalism wastes day in, day out as part of its normal modus vivendi.

I think that's well said, S_A. And the greatest reforming government this country has seen - in my view - was voted in by a mass electorate on a large turnout (I mean the Attlee government). It created institutions and a momentum for reconstruction and near-full employment which were accepted by the opposition Conservatives even when Labour was voted out of office.

I'd also mention the despair and growing contempt for governing parties which afflicted Germany in the last years of the Weimar Republic. If people abandon those committed to democracy and the rule of law, then the way is open for more extreme parties (and to some extent that is a process taking place in various countries in Europe today, notably Hungary).

The "don't vote - they're all crooks" creed may actually lead to really unpleasant crooks taking over.