O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[the_anticlough]

That's a good question. I changed my view on UKIP/Reform a bit after attending an academic talk that argued that (a) every modern European democracy has some form of populist/Trump-esque right wing party; and (b) and that the UKIP of the time (Reform may be different) was probably the most moderate version of that kind of party. Especially compared to the BNP (which very briefly competed electorally) and parties in the AfD in Germany. I don't like them, I've never liked them, but they represent a legitimate body of opinion, and I'd rather them than the likes of the BNP.

There's also no denying that the current electoral system has been deeply unfair to the Kippers and to the Greens. Their support in the country hasn't translated to parliamentary seats, and although part of me loves a good laugh at Farage failing to win a set yet again, the democratic part of my soul has to grudging admit that that's a problem. It's also handed massively unfair electoral advantage to the Tories (and very occasionally, Labour), but most of all to the SNP. No wonder people of all stripes are disillusioned with politics with this level of disconnect between votes and seats. It also keeps artificially broad coalitions like Labour and the Tories together, when they should really be separate parties.

So I'm absolutely on board with electoral reform. Which version is trickier.

I'd very much welcome Reform committing to electoral reform (rather than just trying to shrink the state, cut taxes for the rich, and try to stoke culture war nonsense), but I wouldn't vote for them even if they promised to pass electoral reform and then call an election. Partly because electoral reform shouldn't be done via a single party, and partly because it'll take time to pass and arrange. I don't think Reform have the people, experience, competence, grasp of reality, or integrity to be in government for any length of time. I wouldn't trust them not to take advantage and meddle under the guise of being a caretaker govt and decisions needing to be made. And I absolutely don't want them anywhere near power in case some urgent crisis emerges.

So it's a no from me. But they would be a powerful voice for electoral reform. and I'm surprised they've never been interested in it.

It's a well-crafted conundrum from Driller. The easy answer is yes.
But you have to think there would be other options for pursuing that goal.

A lesson from the whole Brexit disaster for those on the left who backed it (not me) is that the vehicle you're using to achieve something is just as important as the destination you're aiming for. So a political/democratic goal is not worth pursuing if it's on the terms, and to the benefit of, a political entity you absolutely oppose.

[OchPie]

GB News only became a 'thing', because the main stream news became so biased towards the left, in TV terms anyway.

The news in the UK is biased towards the establishment, not the left. That's why Tufton St get people on so often.

GBeebies is anti-establishment. It just so happens that currently the loudest voices against the establishment - real or imagined - are on the right (and the hard right at that), but they draft on the occasional anti-establishment lefty sacrificial lamb.

[the_anticlough]

GBeebies is anti-establishment.

How is it? I wouldn't watch, but is it railing against the wealth and power of corporations, big business, finance? Inherited wealth and power? The aristocracy, monarchy? Private education and its advantages and privileges?
Genuine question

[upthemaggies]

GB News only became a 'thing', because the main stream news became so biased towards the left, in TV terms anyway.

It is amazing that people happy to take in the news from their side of the political fence, become very upset when a new news outlet tries to put the other side of the story.

Democracy is dying on it's feet, and free speech is going the same way.

I've often seen GB news dismissed as "controlled opposition".

I don't think anybody could deny though - if they've got their eyes open - that Big business, the US war machine, the 1% or whatever have set about harnessing the left by using their language and symbolism over the last few years after becoming sh** scared of a popular uprising a decade or so ago.

Upholding Christian values doesn't resonate with anything like as many people as it once did and it's no longer viable to pull everybody up to a decent Western standard of living with increasing populations and dwindling resources, so rather than promising to improve your lot in the spirit of our lord and saviour, they've realised that weaponizing nature, health and the environment whilst banging on about "keeping everybody safe" and "saving the planet" is the way forward to maintain control as well as presenting them with an opportunity to gradually set about seizing power/land from the middle classes/farmers for continuity of lifestyle and excess that those at the very top exclusively enjoy.

If it was easier to use right wing rhetoric to get everybody in line, they would have done so, but with pop culture and its' infantile world view having infected the minds of three or four generations across the board over the past 50/60 years, it's easier to appeal to and appease the majority in this day and age by sticking a rainbow on everything whilst shutting down the free thinkers as racists, nazis and conspiracy theorists.

[Magpies1959]

Whatever your political bias, I think we are heading for a very different and scary future.
Luckily I am old enough to have lived through the good times. It is the kids I feel sorry for, who are being indoctrinated at school, to believe the real problems are saving the effing planet and deciding which gender you are

[SwalePie]

Whatever your political bias, I think we are heading for a very different and scary future.
Luckily I am old enough to have lived through the good times. It is the kids I feel sorry for, who are being indoctrinated at school, to believe the real problems are saving the effing planet and deciding which gender you are

You don't think 'saving the effing planet' is a real problem?

[the_anticlough]

Whatever your political bias, I think we are heading for a very different and scary future.
Luckily I am old enough to have lived through the good times. It is the kids I feel sorry for, who are being indoctrinated at school, to believe the real problems are saving the effing planet and deciding which gender you are

This is wrong on so many levels. But let's start with the fact that kids don't even go to school* because the tories haven't even been able to provide buildings safe enough to go to.

(*not including private schools)

[upthemaggies]

You don't think 'saving the effing planet' is a real problem?

Saving it from what and from who?

In football terms, the "Climate change" movement would be like some super rich owner in the wings about to buy Notts out of another inevitable slump whilst cryptically posting about a "#Nottsprogress deal until enough people are on board with it, then it turns out that the whole #Nottsprogress endgame is moving the club MK Dons style 50 odd miles away to "save it from certain extinction" and "secure it's future in a better environment", by which time half the fan base are so hooked by the new owners spiel that anybody against it is a #Nottsprogress denier. "You don't believe in Notts progressing???? You want Notts to go backwards???? Ha ha ha, you call yourself a supporter!!! what an idiot."

[Jampie]

it's no longer viable to pull everybody up to a decent Western standard of living with increasing populations and dwindling resources

It's not your narrative so I'm not picking fault with you here, but this is absolutely false.

The only reason any western population is increasing is immigration. So that side of it is 100% designed and intended.

Also, resources as a whole aren't dwindling at all.

Oil's about as expensive as it's ever been, but there's still more than enough left for whatever we might want if we progressively stop burning it instead of turning it into useful chemicals. One of the huge advantages of renewable energy is that it doesn't run out. I actually think "renewable" is a bad name for it. Should be "infinite energies" or something. The sun won't stop shining in a useful manner for billions of years to come, and as long as it does so, wind and solar power will be viable as well.

If you like nuclear tech, there isn't any kind of practical limitation on uranium at the moment either, and if there were it would just ultimately make breeder reactors commercially viable.

In terms of minerals, every metal we use can be recycled.

We just aren't short on resources at all, and most of the "green" ideas people malign will stretch these already abundant resources much further.

Personally I think about 80% of the "left vs. right" arguments are almost completely fabricated and are certainly inflated by 1%-owned media who want the 99% divided and fighting each other while they continue their completely idiotic and pointless robbery of same.

The "culture war" nonsense is a great example of this. Get enough people yelling at each other about the definition of words and literally he-said-she-said debates and you don't have to explain why wages haven't kept up with profits for four decades straight.

[SwalePie]

Saving it from what and from who?

In football terms, the "Climate change" movement would be like some super rich owner in the wings about to buy Notts out of another inevitable slump whilst cryptically posting about a "#Nottsprogress deal until enough people are on board with it, then it turns out that the whole #Nottsprogress endgame is moving the club MK Dons style 50 odd miles away to "save it from certain extinction" and "secure it's future in a better environment", by which time half the fan base are so hooked by the new owners spiel that anybody against it is a #Nottsprogress denier. "You don't believe in Notts progressing???? You want Notts to go backwards???? Ha ha ha, you call yourself a supporter!!! what an idiot."

You think climate change is a movement?