Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by palo5

The British government has never been democratically elected, but EU Commissioners are chosen by democratically elected governments, except for the UK Commissioner
And you have a problem with that?
Please tell us what it is

Nah, the questions are far too daft to be taken seriously

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

There is something distinctly surreal about being lectured about democracy by someone hailing from a country where there has not been a democratic vote cast since the days of the Rus..

Yup just compare how various organisations measure democracy
See where Russia is compared to the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_...m_in_the_World
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
UK 16 Russia 134

You have a problem with our first past the post system but look at the recent German election results and the horse trading that follows.

Our system is not perfect by any means, and none of us have ever said it is, but I don't see anything else in current use that I would swap it for.

[Brecht]

Originally Posted by Oswald

You think this is the result of "foreign rule"? This has nothing to do with Thatcher, her peers and successors? Britain was basically the first European country to privatize major public companies and entire industries or to shut them down. No one in Europe was doing it at the time. They are doing it today and they learned it from the UK. If you're blaming the EU and the "eurocrats" for your failures, you cannot and will not be taken seriously.

The UK enjoyed a special status in the EU. Your governments were blackmailing the rest of the EU for years, demanding special treatment and privileges like the UK rebate, in effect since 1985 and negotiated every seven years. As for open borders, I'm not a fan of that either but the UK never even joined the Schengen Area. European Law has a different status in the UK as it has the right to pick the laws it doesn't want in its legislation.

No one questions Britain's right to its own currency. It's interesting how your governments reacted after the financial crisis. They resisted every idea to regulate the financial institutions or to introduce a financial transaction tax.

The Brexit referendum was another British attempt to blackmail the rest of the EU and new privileges had to be granted. Cameron thought that Brexit wouldn't get a majority anyway but his plan backfired. Despite all justified criticism of the EU, you are not and never were ruled by the "eurocrats" nor is the EU responsible for your industrial suicide.

And blaming it all on Edward Heath and whoever else "betrayed you" (what you seem to believe) is not going to help you understand your present situation either. When the UK joined the EU, British politicians expected to become the dominant force in Europe. They thought they'd "call the shots" and were encouraged by the Americans to become a member state. Britain was practically banging on Europe's door but it was de Gaulle who didn't want you in the EU. For him the UK was nothing but an American trojan horse and he was right.

Despite deindustrialization and falling living standards, the UK managed to remain a very rich country and its privileged status had a lot to do with this. All the money you didn't have to contribute to the EU budget could have been invested in the recovery of your industries or the NHS. But your governments thought it's a better idea to illegally invade a sovereign country like Iraq and wreak havoc in the Middle East. When was the last time you were invaded?

Brexit can be a good thing if you want to put an end to austerity. If your arguments were against the rising social inequality, the influx of cheap labor force which can have disastrous consequences for your labor and housing market and the social system, (something the British working class fought for but has forgotten about as it seems), I would express all my solidarity with this decision. What you offer instead is nationalism, conspiracy theories and untruths. This happens when you're not accounting for the past and when you think everything your country did in its history, like during its imperial heyday, was great.

It's disappointing that some British friends here think the EU should be a market only, something like a consumerist empire or a shopping mall. This is exactly the reason why the EU member states are drifting apart. What used to be a British plan benefited only Germany. They learned from Mrs. Thatcher except that they weren't stupid enough to destroy their industry and let the financial sector run everything.

My advise to you is to get your facts straight. Become a thinking and informed citizen if you want to live in a democracy and a country that cares about the well-being of its people, not its elites and overseas tax havens.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

You have a problem with our first past the post system but look at the recent German election results and the horse trading that follows

Horse trading? So you think your lack of a constitution and hatred of Europe is preferable to what Germany has?

No, it just gives you permanently unrepresentative and therefore undemocratic governments. Germany will be fine

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by palo5

Horse trading? So you think your lack of a constitution and hatred of Europe is preferable to what Germany has?

No, it just gives you permanently unrepresentative and therefore undemocratic governments. Germany will be fine

Horse trading?

The Tories spent £1 billion buying the DUP sectarian Carthorse, at least the German Coalition Parties don't have a paramilitary wing.

Nothing else to swap it for Wendigo? Well, how come PR was chosen for the devolved UK Parliaments if FTTP is so superior? Nobody wants to change back to FPTP there, not even the Tories.

[Mal Hombre]

Originally Posted by palo5

Germany will be fine

I'll bet Frau Merkel isn't so sure of that,right now..

[Roger Allott]

Originally Posted by palo5

Horse trading? So you think your lack of a constitution and hatred of Europe is preferable to what Germany has?

However many morons repeat the nonsensical mantra that the UK lacks a constitution, it will never make it true.

The UK's constitution has been written over the course of many centuries, and is routinely kept under review to keep it relevant to the modern age.

.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by palo5

Horse trading? So you think your lack of a constitution and hatred of Europe is preferable to what Germany has?

No, it just gives you permanently unrepresentative and therefore undemocratic governments. Germany will be fine

Oh dear boy when will you learn ???

Yes we do not have a single bound written constitution but that is not a bad thing in itself.
After two mass shooting incidents at Hungerford and Dunblane, Parliament enacted strict gun control measures that would be inconceivable in a place like the USA which has a written constitution. I do not want my country to be tied to what was politically convenient 200 or 300 years ago

We do not hate Europe, we just do not like the EU, there is a massive difference and once again this has been pointed out many times. However you cannot see past your natural bias against Britain, come on comrade only a really narrow minded numpty cannot see the difference

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

However many morons repeat the nonsensical mantra that the UK lacks a constitution, it will never make it true.

The UK's constitution has been written over the course of many centuries, and is routinely kept under review to keep it relevant to the modern age.

.

Kept under review? By who exactly? The likes of Blair and Thatcher?

Apart from a few constitutional lawyers and judges no-one has a clue what it is really. For example the court case over triggering Article 30 and 'surprise' many had that like everything else made law it required an Act of Parliament. (Even then some seemed to think we should dispose with judges and Parliament and just have May exercising the divine right of Kings)

Unlike say the US, ordinary citizens have no idea what it is or access to it.
This only serves the interests of the Ruling Party and those with power and access to expensive lawyers.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

Kept under review? By who exactly? The likes of Blair and Thatcher?

Apart from a few constitutional lawyers and judges no-one has a clue what it is really. For example the court case over triggering Article 30 and 'surprise' many had that like everything else made law it required an Act of Parliament. (Even then some seemed to think we should dispose with judges and Parliament and just have May exercising the divine right of Kings)

Unlike say the US, ordinary citizens have no idea what it is or access to it.
This only serves the interests of the Ruling Party and those with power and access to expensive lawyers.

We have evolved over centuries and on the whole it has been a process of social improvement. In a sense, the answer to your question is that everyone in Britain keeps our system under review because our parliament and politicians cannot successfully rule us except with our consent. Occasionally that consent is withdrawn and change happens, regardless of whether the elites wanted it to happen.

Sometimes it is single issues, such as the Poll Tax or the fuel excise duty tax escalator; these were cases where there was a mutiny of the population and the government, palpably against its own will, accepted defeat. In the past we have had more extreme withdrawings of popular consent, the most extreme one being the fall and execution of King Charles I, who laboured under the lethal misunderstanding that the people were there to do his bidding like slaves, whereas actually he was actually there to serve them and they could (and did) remove him.

Just because the constitutional mechanisms are not written down doesn't mean they aren't there.

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

We have evolved over centuries and on the whole it has been a process of social improvement. In a sense, the answer to your question is that everyone in Britain keeps our system under review because our parliament and politicians cannot successfully rule us except with our consent. Occasionally that consent is withdrawn and change happens, regardless of whether the elites wanted it to happen.

Sometimes it is single issues, such as the Poll Tax or the fuel excise duty tax escalator; these were cases where there was a mutiny of the population and the government, palpably against its own will, accepted defeat. In the past we have had more extreme withdrawings of popular consent, the most extreme one being the fall and execution of King Charles I, who laboured under the lethal misunderstanding that the people were there to do his bidding like slaves, whereas actually he was actually there to serve them and they could (and did) remove him.

Just because the constitutional mechanisms are not written down doesn't mean they aren't there.

Well for example 'Freedom of Speech and Expression' unlike in the USA is not there and cannot be used by ordinary citizens.

So next April if under the Digital Economy Act this site is blacklisted and closed down there is nothing you can do to stop it - nothing. You'll find out like this site any UK constitutional right to free speech is just not there. Maybe it could be set up again somewhere where this right it is protected.