Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[Wendigo]

Too many were driven by nostalgia, where passports were blue, faces were white and the map was coloured imperial pink. And it was their votes on one wet day in June which crushed the hopes and aspirations of young people for years to come.
~ Vincent Cable - Liberal Democrat Party spring conference.

Interesting to juxtapose that bleating Liberal bullshit from such a political non-entity in the big scheme of things, against how many of us felt years after the 1975 referendum, I was 25 and at the time of the referendum I voted REMAIN as a young voter I felt that our leaders had taken us into a trade organisation that would benefit all Europe, all the literature we had been sent promised us a brighter future. They clearly stated that no political union was planned.

Years down the line it became clear our leaders of all parties had blatantly lied to us, so what do Cable and others of his whining mindset care about how OUR hopes and aspirations (young people in 1975) were crushed for years to come by later changes over which we had no control?

He won't have an answer to that as he is a blinkered donkey of a politician, it's EU all the way, he has always followed the Brussels carrot.

[laberbacke]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

This is what British people are up against - the mindset which says that if you want to control immigration and are opposed to the free movement of people, you are therefore racist and it is legitimate and praiseworthy to denounce you, defy your vote and continue to promote greater EU integration.

Only by leaving the EU can we render such people powerless to betray us.

I can understand that from a German perspective. If you so much as mention the need for better control of immigration here, you are guilty of thoughtcrime and immediately put in a sack with racists and Nazis. If you so much as mention that immigrants from a certain cultural and religious background have a harder time integrating into our society due to factors inherently rooted in that background, and therefore controlling the immigration of this group in particular is prudent to protect our security and liberal society, you again get called out as a racist and Nazi.


However it's also true that a certain percentage of the population is racist and xenophobic and just doesn't want brown people to live in their neighborhood, period. No matter if they're doctors and nuclear physicists. That was a factor in the Brexit vote, as it was a factor in the election of Donald Trump, or the strong presidential bid of Marine LePen. Some voters, especially among the older generations, want their neighborhoods and parliaments to be whiter again. It's no surprise that these voters can predominantly be found in the more rural regions of France, the US and England, where actual contact between natives and immigrants is very limited due to few immigrants living in those communities.



The irony of Brexit is that the bulk of EU funds go to those struggling rural communities in little England that put the vote to leave over the finish line, and I believe those communities will feel the hit once those subsidies go away. Given the Tories' penchant of not having the greates track record with supporting working class people, and given the tight purse that the government will be required to maintain after Brexit, I have serious doubts that they will compensate those communities for the lack of EU subsidies with more funds from London.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The European Commission is the executive arm of the EU - that makes Mr Juncker an important and powerful person; he is the CEO of the European Union

No, yes, and no

The Commission is not the executive arm of the EU. It is powerful because it is the only body that can propose EU legislation, but it can only do it with the agreement of the EU Council, and carry it through with ratification of the EU Parliament. So it's not what you understand it is

Juncker manages the Commission, and often speaks for it, so that makes him influential. But he can't make decisions on his own, so he's not the CEO you portray him as. When he speaks in public, he reflects opinions already held by member states, or most of them

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Next year he will be replaced on a "Buggins Turn" basis by Martin Selmayr

Only if he's elected by the Council and confirmed by Parliament

Your observations regarding the British voting system are actually rather amusing. It shows a certain lack of self-awareness

Hehehe! Actually, we try out new voting systems in different districts of our country in every election. We're trying to find the most appropriate, and I don't know how long it will take

UK on the other hand, uses a system that always produces minority governments, often with miraculously huge majorities that in no way represent the will of the people. So it is justified criticism and historically 100% true. With such a rigged system, it is why I have never seen UK as a "democracy"

Btw, I'm not particularly democratic myself and don't claim higher ground. But I have no love for countries that claim they're something they are not. What's to admire about hypocrisy?

[bloke57]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

This is what British people are up against - the mindset which says that if you want to control immigration and are opposed to the free movement of people, you are therefore racist and it is legitimate and praiseworthy to denounce you, defy your vote and continue to promote greater EU integration.

Only by leaving the EU can we render such people powerless to betray us.

I'm guessing you wouldn't be a fan of comedian Stewart Lee then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uovt1sC3rtM

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by bloke57

I'm guessing you wouldn't be a fan of comedian Stewart Lee then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uovt1sC3rtM

Never heard of him, I'm afraid.

[laberbacke]

Originally Posted by palo5

Only if he's elected by the Council and confirmed by Parliament

Hehehe! Actually, we try out new voting systems in different districts of our country in every election. We're trying to find the most appropriate, and I don't know how long it will take

UK on the other hand, uses a system that always produces minority governments, often with miraculously huge majorities that in no way represent the will of the people. So it is justified criticism and historically 100% true. With such a rigged system, it is why I have never seen UK as a "democracy"

Btw, I'm not particularly democratic myself and don't claim higher ground. But I have no love for countries that claim they're something they are not. What's to admire about hypocrisy?

Electoral systems with proportionate representation might be technically more democratic, but they can also be terribly unstable. If I remember this correctly, there hasn't been a government in Italy in several decades that managed to complete even a single term.


I say "technically", because small splinter parties that are needed to secure the majorities of a multi-party coalition government can extort concessions well beyond their representation of the voter share. Take the ultra-orthodox religious Shas party in Israel as an example. Controls only 7 seats in the 120 seat Knesset, but extorts special treatment for its fundamentalist followers time and again, because Netanyahu needs those seven seats to stay in power.



I like that bit about "try out new voting systems", though. Russian humor.

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by laberbacke

I say "technically", because small splinter parties that are needed to secure the majorities of a multi-party coalition government can extort concessions well beyond their representation of the voter share. Take the ultra-orthodox religious Shas party in Israel as an example. Controls only 7 seats in the 120 seat Knesset, but extorts special treatment for its fundamentalist followers time and again, because Netanyahu needs those seven seats to stay in power.

Small extremist splinter groups extort special treatment now under FPTP in the UK. It's just they exist within the Tory Party (the ERG) and DUP coalition. The DUP have fundamentalist agenda (anti-abortion/ anti-gay anti-evolution, climate change deniers) and even have a paramilitary wing.

[laberbacke]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

Small extremist splinter groups extort special treatment now under FPTP in the UK. It's just they exist within the Tory Party (the ERG) and DUP coalition. The DUP have fundamentalist agenda (anti-abortion/ anti-gay anti-evolution, climate change deniers) and even have a paramilitary wing.

True, but that's a rare occurence under the FPTP system in the UK, where usually one party holds the majority of seats without the need to form coalitions.

[scoundrel]

Mrs May is being justly punished for the sheer hubris of her Tory Boy inspired election manifesto, and for her arrogance in thinking that she could get away with anything she wanted, because Labour were in such a weak position. She ran the worst election campaign I have seen since Michael Foot; it made Michael Howard in 2005 look good. The dementia tax was a perfectly targeted attack on people who worked a whole lifetime for modest rewards and who have already paid tax on the assets they accumulated over decades of hard graft - people who should have been natural Tory voters. Then, just to add insult to injury, she wanted to bring back fox hunting - most British voters, and probably most Tory voters, think this is right up there with hare coursing, dog-fighting, badger baiting and pulling the legs off spiders.

Mrs May is now beholden to the DUP for the ability to hold office. There is no other party in the Commons which will support Brexit. But the terms of the DUP are the reason why she is forced to concoct a complex and unworkable hybrid solution - the Chequers Plan. If she did not need the DUP just to be in office, I am pretty sure we would be seeing an open border in Northern Ireland, a customs border between Northern Ireland and the UK, and a free trade deal covering goods and services between the UK and the European Economic Area (including Northern Ireland). It is not the national interest, but the Tory Party's internal problems and its failure to seek and gain a mandate to deliver Brexit, which are preventing simple and practical solutions.