b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 9869605 (Thread)

# Give it a few months and they will all be 'Bums'
:D
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:01, archived)
# This - HARD!

HARD Hopefully
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:04, archived)
# Whoever replaces them will inevitably be of the same caliber
in both integrity and morals.
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:07, archived)
# This is true and a damning indictment of our democratic system
that allows for choice only to be made from those main parties who all offer the same fare - if you voted outside of the 2 main parties you vote with your consciousness but that doesn't make any odds whatsoever as you know it won't change anything. Apathy is the growing consensus and the sooner Politicians take note of the massive amount of people not voting then they will finally be aware their politics have become more of an Oligarchy than a Democracy!

/steps down from soapbox
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:13, archived)
# The UK has been an oligarchy for a VERY long time
If anything things have improved.. to quote Blackadder, "Democracy isn't fair. Take Manchester: population 600000; electoral roll 3"
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:17, archived)
# When it was Lib/Lab/Con it was Working Class/Middle Class/Upper Class
Now it's all Banker Class - so it hasn't improved for the majority of us.
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:24, archived)
# I think the old 3-class system has been replaced by the new 3-class system:
Twats
Chavs
Us
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:27, archived)
# True
but it's only been Lab/Lib/Con for the past 100 odd years, for a very long time it was only Lib/Con. In the lifeline of democracy in the UK, the working classes had genuine political representationon only very briefly , before Labour was taken over by the professional middle classes.

But I do agree with you, something's got to give. IMO, we need electoral reform urgently.
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:34, archived)
# 1) Good, because parties representing classes is akin to tribal warfare.
2) If you mean PR, it makes every government a coalition and everything becomes even more centrist. Everybody is essentially always in power, at least a bit. If you mean direct democracy, see (1). Which is not to say that indirect democracy makes any sense, but it's a system under which bastards get power and then you hurl abuse at them for decade or so and vote them out in favour of different bastards who appear nicer, and as such is better than a system (and I mean proportional representation as well as direct democracy) without anybody specific to complain at. At least under the current system somebody has to be a bit creative to get in power.

Ideally nobody (rather than everybody) would have the power.
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 10:12, archived)
# * pinches soap-box

slides down a big snowy hill on it shouting "You'll never take me alive copper!"
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:24, archived)
# But to me, it's not apathy with the sytem or the parties
it's apathy with the public

We have a system in place which ACN change the political make up of the country, but people choose not to make the leap.

The London mayor election was a great example fot his. People voted in Boris because they were bored with ken, without giving a second thought to any other candidate.
(, Wed 13 Jan 2010, 9:47, archived)