Britain's Future

treeve

Major Contributor
Out of a British Electorate of c45,200,000,
10,706,647 (23%) have voted Tory to occupy 306 seats (48%),
8,604,358 (19%) have voted Labour to occupy 258 seats (40%)
and 6,827,938 (15%) have voted LibDem to occupy 57 seats (10%).
The highest opinion has been expressed by 15,820,000 (35%) of the Electorate that they either have no faith in British Politics at all or that they do not care or know.

Is this is the confusing result of a projection of indecisive ideals and morals by a weak political system, or a poorly organised 'first past the post' system or will it be the better for the British Public that for the first time they will get a series of policies and scene that will rely on Good Old British Politics, of consultation, discussion and grind, without the iron boot of Party Politics and the Megalomaniac Thatcherism that killed off the country, its employment and prosperity.

On the other hand will it produce a weak government with a distinct lack of workable policy?

What do you think?

This is entirely personal opinion, with no facts to back any viewpoint, unless some parallel can be drawn from a much more decisive and greater scene in history.

I also avoid taking any political stance itself.
 
Last edited:

symons55

Moderator
Staff member
Speaking personally Treeve I'm not into politics so I'll bow out of this one.
 
Last edited:

BayOfPlenty

Member
I found it somewhat bizarre that the party that gained by far the fewest votes (of the 'Big Three') ended up having the decision over how the new Parliament would be formed. Furthermore, I seem to recall a certain Mr D. Cameron claiming not so long ago that a hung Parliament would be "a disaster for Britain". If a week is a long time in politics, then a couple of weeks is an eternity, it would seem! Politicians, eh? :D
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Quite, perhaps a disaster for Tory policies, rather than for Britain. Where is Gladstone when we need him? We get fed a load of old rope, how apposite we should get a hung parliament!!
 

P_Trembath

The Best
"......Party Politics and the Megalomaniac Thatcherism that killed off the country, its employment and prosperity."
I fear that I must point out that the country was on a distinct downward slope long before that fateful day in May 1979, in fact, I would say that the start of the First World War was the start of the process, but that is whole different thread.
"I also avoid taking any political stance itself."
With all due respect, I would suggest that it is a "party political stance" that you were avoiding. The very act of writing your post is inherently political. The confusion between politics and party politics is, perhaps, part of the reason for the apathy that your quoted figures seem to suggest. In fact, I would suggest that those very figures, better for overall turnout than for a number of previous elections, are a clear indication that the old 2 or 3 party system that has been "developed" is in dire need of a severe shake-up, with the "larger" parties being broken up in to "smaller" ones, giving the general public a wider choice of policy to choose from, and ensuring that in order to achieve anything worthwhile, all parties need to work together properly, with individual MP's being able to vote with their conscience on all matters (the complete removal of a viable party whip).
As far as the sort of government we will now get, will depend on how long it takes before one of the "partners" throws their toys out of the pram. It should start of as a relatively strong government, albeit with a very small majority, but I would be prepared for another election soon. It should be noted that in recent years, say the last 100 or so, coalition governments have only "worked" during times of war.
 

ibrowze

Senior Member
Democracy? How I laughed and laughed....................

How can it claim to be a democracy when the top 3 choices are between The Gallows, Madame Guillotine or The Firing Squad? Whatever the outcome the rich remain rich, the poor remain poor, there will always be unemployment and the wars will continue.
Is that what the people want?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

treeve

Major Contributor
Democracy - any government of a country duly elected by the people to act on their common behalf, that is to say egalitarian and tolerant. That is what we have. The question was - is the present arrangement likely to be beneficial or otherwise to the British People.
 

ibrowze

Senior Member
Democracy, that's a joke

I did answer with my opinion clearly and concisely I suggest you read and digest my post again......
 

P_Trembath

The Best
How can it claim to be a democracy when the top 3 choices are between The Gallows, Madame Guillotine or The Firing Squad? Whatever the outcome the rich remain rich, the poor remain poor, there will always be unemployment and the wars will continue.
Is that what the people want?

Democracy is a small word that covers a very large range of ideas, some would argue that the very fact that "we" have the chance to collectively choose our preferred method of execution is proof of our living, and dying, in a democratic system.
It is interesting to note that you chose 3 execution methods, indicative of the "big 3" political parties that seem to dominate politics in Britain. The problem is that far too many of us seem to believe what both the "big 3" and the media tell us. We are told that a vote for anyone other than "x", "y" or "z", is a wasted vote, as it is only one of them who is capable of running the "country". When the reality is that many of the other parties are just as capable of doing it.
Now, in our constituency, there were 7 candidates, from 7 different, diverse, parties, some small and some quite large. Under our "democratic" FPTP system, you are perfectly at liberty to vote for any one of those 7 candidates, you do not have to vote for one of the "big 3".
The reason that for the last 100 plus years we have endured a 3 (ish) party system, is because the general public have, for whatever reason, permitted it to continue. We have the power to change it, but have, so far, decided not to. In effect, it is us who have democratically chosen to continue being hung, beheaded or shot. We, the public, are that proverbial turkey that just loves Christmas soooooo much.
Whether we like it or not, it is democracy. We keep, democratically, choosing it. We always get the government we deserve.
If we do not like it then we need to vote for someone/something else, or if there is no-one that we agree with standing in our constituency, then we are fully entitled to stand for election ourselves.
(Not voting is the worst thing that anyone can do, and anyone who does not vote, has no right to complain.)
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Administrator
It still could get worse! the coalition collapses and parliament dissolves and a general election brings no majority to the front.... The monarchy take back power from the commoners!
Ahhhhh!!
 

ibrowze

Senior Member
The big 3 voting system

I think I almost got my point across. There is no alternative on the table to a future where the rich remain rich, the poor remain poor, unemployment persists and wars continue. Anyone offering a solution to the above will automatically be in a minority not only because of the stranglehold the big 3 have on the government but also because corporate interests, banks and fat cat money donors who pay for the campaign trails have no vested interest in creating a society based on resources.
I don't think the majority of voters wanted a Tory prime minister which kind of enhances my frustration at being sold the lie of democracy. I'm looking forward to seeing how the approach towards a change in the voting system pans out but won't hold my breath.
The future really isn't going to change much for the betterment of society though there's a lot of people who don't want to be integrated into Europe yet don't realise that we're now basically another member of the U.S.A.....Oh no? Starbucks, McDonalds, KFC, Snickers, Trident..just watch any hollywood movie supermarket scene and check the companies on the movie shelves that are prevalent on our own supermarket shelves bud, any weiser?
 

46traveller

Member
The trouble with politics is, there's always someone higher up the chain of command that gives the final verdict, ok, but when our government is cajoled into situations by the USA. (which seems to be happening more as the years pass) our own goverment bows down without heeding the general concensus of the British public. As previous conflicts have proved those in power will manipulate the truth to suit their ideas of a perfect world and lots of profit for the weapons industry, with a tad more oil as a bonus. American Corporate interests now hold the world to ransom, threatening to "Bomb Pakistan back to the stone age" is just one example of how things now work if anyone steps out of line.
I firmly believe that at grass roots level our government is fine, with great ideas of how to get things a little better for all. But once ensconsed in the House Of Commons they find out that their ideas of fairness have to take a back seat to investors and foreign interests. How this can be termed democracy ? We now live in a world where traffic wardens are issued with Pace cards and police uniforms. Our lives are subject to DNA samples and we are watched everywhere we go by CCTV. All new British Passports have a microchip in them, giving our details and I would expect a GPS tracker letting the myriad of spy satelites now circling our planet know where we are at any time. I didn't vote for any of this, and I never noticed the laws being passed, but it still happened. The truth is the British government, whatever party is in control, have very little to do with big decisions that affect most of our lives, although they do manage to feather their own nest quite nicely, and usually leave politics to join a Multi National Corporation that their decisions may have helped on their rise to power.
Personally I don't feel safer, just paranoid.

PS. Let's just see Gordon Browns next job. I would expect it to be with a Multi National Banking Corporation, you remember the ones the British Government bailed out, and he won't be making the tea !!!!
 
Last edited:

CHILLYWILLY

Active Member
I keep hearing the rich remain rich, the poor remain poor, unemployment persists and wars continue. Sounds like the onset to the French Revolution all over again. Let's bring the troops back from Moscow.

Thirty years ago I was not poor but certainly struggling so I returned to college and furthered my education. I do not now claim to be rich but I am a lot better off. I have had to work hard for it though. I see to many free hand outs in this country and a third generation of those who believe that living off the state is OK.

I do not mind paying taxes for those who really want to work or cannot work. I am sick of paying out though for those who do not want to work. Solve this and it would go a long way to reducing national debt.
 

ibrowze

Senior Member
Reducing National Debt and Handouts

You have every right to feel miffed about not being able to choose where the tax you pay ends up. And we're in a democracy, right? In the interest of your peace of mind, you'd better not watch the 20 minute speech in the following link exposing the criminal activity within the EU and how your tax is paying for it. I've just heard suggestions for putting VAT on children's clothing, another bloodsucking scheme.
BBC5.tv eyePlayer - EU Corruption
 

46traveller

Member
John Pilger On Form.

Pilger Tells It As It Is.

John Pilger: The party game is over. Stand and fight

"Rise like lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number!
Shake your chains to earth, like dew
Which in sleep had fall'n on you:
Ye are many - they are few."

These days, the stirring lines of Percy Shelley's "Mask of Anarchy" may seem unattainable. I don't think so. Shelley was both a Romantic and political truth-teller. His words resonate now because only one political course is left to those who are disenfranchised and whose ruin is announced on a government spreadsheet.

Born of the "never again" spirit of 1945, social democracy has surrendered to an extreme political cult of money worship. This reached its apogee when £1trn of public money was handed unconditionally to corrupt banks by a Labour government whose leader, Gordon Brown, had previously described "financiers" as the nation's "great example" and his personal "inspiration".

This is not to say parliamentary politics is meaningless. It has one meaning now: the replacement of democracy with a business plan for every human activity, every dream, every decency, every hope, every child born.

The old myths of British rectitude, imperial in origin, provided false comfort while the Blair gang built the foundation of the present "coalition". This is led by a former PR man for an asset stripper and by a bagman who will inherit his knighthood and the tax-shielded fortune of his father, the 17th Baronet of Ballintaylor. David Cameron and George Osborne are essentially fossilised spivs who, in colonial times, would have been sent by their daddies to claim foreign terrain and plunder.

Today, they are claiming 21st-century Britain and imposing their vicious, antique ideology, albeit served as economic snake oil. Their designs have nothing to do with a "deficit crisis". A deficit of 10 per cent is not remotely a crisis. When Britain was officially bankrupt at the end of the Second World War, the government built its greatest public institutions, such as the National Health Service and the arts edifices of London's South Bank.

There is no economic rationale for the assault described cravenly by the BBC as a "public spending review". The debt is exclusively the responsibility of those who incurred it, the super-rich and the gamblers. However, that's beside the point. What is happening in Britain is the seizure of an opportunity to destroy the tenuous humanity of the modern state. It is a coup, a "shock doctrine" as applied to Pinochet's Chile and Yeltsin's Russia.

In Britain, there is no need for tanks in the streets. In its managerial indifference to the freedoms it is said to hold dear, bourgeois Britain has allowed parliament to create a surveillance state with 3,000 new criminal offences and laws: more than for the whole of the previous century. Powers of arrest and detention have never been greater. The police have the impunity to kill; and asylum-seekers can be "restrained" to death on commercial flights.

Athol Fugard is right. With Harold Pinter gone, no acclaimed writer or artist dare depart from their well-remunerated vanity. With so much in need of saying, they have nothing to say. Liberalism, the vainest ideology, has hauled up its ladder. The chief opportunist, Nick Clegg, gave no electoral hint of his odious faction's compliance with the dismantling of much of British postwar society. The theft of £83bn in jobs and services matches almost exactly the amount of tax legally avoided by piratical corporations. Without fanfare, the super-rich have been assured they can dodge up to £40bn in tax payments in the secrecy of Swiss banks. The day this was sewn up, Osborne attacked those who "cheat" the welfare system. He omitted the real amount lost, a minuscule £0.5bn, and that £10.5bn in benefit payments was not claimed at all. Labour is his silent partner.

The propaganda arm in the press and broadcasting dutifully presents this as unfortunate but necessary. Mark how the firefighters' action is "covered". On Channel 4 News, following an item that portrayed modest, courageous people as basically reckless, Jon Snow demanded that the leaders of the London Fire Authority and the Fire Brigades Union go straight from the studio and "mediate" now, this minute. "I'll get the taxis!" he declared. Forget the thousands of jobs that are to be eliminated from the fire service and the public danger beyond Bonfire Night; knock their jolly heads together. "Good stuff!" said the presenter.

Ken Loach's 1983 documentary series Questions of Leadership opens with a sequence of earnest young trade unionists on platforms, exhorting the masses. They are then shown older, florid, self-satisfied and finally adorned in the ermine of the House of Lords. Once, at a Durham Miners' Gala, I asked Tony Woodley, now joint general secretary of Unite, "Isn't the problem the clockwork collaboration of the union leadership?" He almost agreed, implying that the rise of bloods like himself would change that. The British Airways cabin crew strike, over which Woodley presides, is said to have made gains. Has it? And why haven't the unions risen against totalitarian laws that place free trade unionism in a vice?

The BA workers, the firefighters, the council workers, the post office workers, the NHS workers, the London Underground staff, the teachers, the lecturers, the students can more than match the French if they are resolute and imaginative, forging, with the wider social justice movement, potentially the greatest popular resistance ever. Look at the web; listen to the public's support at fire stations.
There is no other way now. Direct action. Civil disobedience. Unerring. Read Shelley and do it..
 

46traveller

Member
democracy_will_come_to_you.jpg
 
Top Bottom