Off TopicAre you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
(
rob, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
The Majority of Labour MP's supported No2AV, and the Party Leadership don't actually support PR for the CommonsI do support PR for all levels of government as it happens, I take a strongly radical view on our constitution , as opposed to the party I support. As in, there need to be a official one.
If you Labour fair elections, why don't you give us PR next time you're in? Add in a Written constitution and full Federalism and do ma favour
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:17, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)
Was I talking about Labour? No I wasn't, so fuck off.Just because Labour also didn't want a fairer system (though fuck knows why, it can only have benefited them) doesn't make this gerrymandering anything less than gerrymandering.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:18, Reply)
What Al says is da troof.Of course the two biggest parties don't want to remove FPTP. Gravy train shizzle. It only benefits fringe parties (including the Lib Dems) and their supporters. If you want to see the BNP and the Communist Party with elected, legislative powers, then feel free to bring in pure PR.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:21, Reply)
That's the kind of disengenous argument I really hate thoughI don't like the fact that some people think that the BNP hold valid views. But the way to deal with those people is not to say "your views are invalid and you cannot be represented" because that simply means it's also perfectly logical to say to all Lib Dem voters that their views aren't valid either.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:26, Reply)
I know.But there's a massive part of me (cocklols) that says that repugnant views should be excluded from the main decision making system. The liberal, intelligent part of me says that the best way to deal with these people is to engage with them publicly and expose them as idiots.
Hence me engaging with ToryBoy.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:29, Reply)
WTF?Theres a huge difference between engaging with a conservative/Christian Democrat/Libertarian/Free Marketeer , and an Ultranationalist?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:30, Reply)
No there isn't.And religion shouldn't be a part of politics in the UK.
There is no place for it in a secular, civilised democracy.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:31, Reply)
Christian Democracy is the European sense, as in Germany's largest party and a non denominational organisation, not the fundamentalist sense.
And legally the British State is not secular yet, although I'd like it to be.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:33, Reply)
As soon as it's referred to as Christian it stops being nondenominational, you fucking pillock.(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:34, Reply)
It accepts people of all faiths and noneen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Democratic_Union_(Germany)
Lets see you take a look at this link and try to paint the largest political party in Europe as some crazy minority outfit.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:36, Reply)
Minority status is not the point.The point is that religion has no place in state-level decision making, just as it has no place in education. That way lies Syria, Iran, Eire and the USA.
Fucking fruitcakes.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:40, Reply)
They've ruled Germany for 42 years, If they wanted to make it into a Religious state they'd have well succeeded by now.
Anyway wasn't there a saying about the Labour party?
"They're more Methodist than Marx"?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:45, Reply)
You should.Especially as you claim to be mixed race.
Remember Tebbitt's cricket question? Racist cunts, and you support them. So what does that make you? A cuntfan, that's what?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:57, Reply)
So you seriously believe that anyone whose political views are to the right of the center is racist?And anyway, the Cricket Question wasn't ever seriously considered as an actual migration clause, though as a way of measuring national identity it ain't to shabby.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:01, Reply)
Of course it's a fucking shabby way to measure national identity.Any right wing party tends toward Xenophobia.
And of course I know that it wasn't a migration clause, you bell. It was just Tebbitt showing himself up as a cunt in public.
One can be fiercely proud/ aware of one's status as an outsider/other but still take an active part in the affairs of their adopted country.
I'd advise you to read The Satanic Verses, but it would go way over your head.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:06, Reply)
So you recon that if all mainstream politics was centre-left, this world would have no racismAnd would be better in every way?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:08, Reply)
Or sarcastic.You decide.
This is fucking tedious.
Can you no go out and get some bum action or something instead of discussing lolitics on here with people twice your age?
When I was your age I was skating, smoking weed, listening to hip hop and punk rock, fingering girls, watching Taxi Driver, reading and playing videogames.
Before that, I was into politics. Bit like you, but left wing instead of right. Go out and get some bum or something, y'hear me?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:19, Reply)
State educated and from the West Midlands too. Poor boy, he'll never be a proper Tory.
(
The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:02,
Reply)
He'll think he's finally getting therebut all the others will be laughing at him and looking down on him behind his back.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:05, Reply)
He could do a Pickles and commit class treason.Either that, or 'trade' on his minority status and go for the bummer vote.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:07, Reply)
Are you some kind of terrorist?Everyone knows the only way the western world will achieve any kind of security is if it embraces Christian supremacy and purifies the non-believers.
You people put up a good show against the Muslims on Sunday though. Good work there.
(
The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:41,
Reply)
LOL!SRSLY BBZ?
I Wonder What He Thinks About Proporshunal Representatives?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:35, Reply)
I'm listening to the new Pete Murray albumit's not hip hop so I'm sure you've never heard of him.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:38, Reply)
I'm not all about the hip hop.Listening to this the now www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_LV9HN_c5s
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:42, Reply)
I can see Bristol City getting relegated this season.Which will probably spell administration.
(
JeffTheDogFucker Can you dig it?, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:42,
Reply)
Yesthis is another reason you should come to Montys bash. You get to say that you were at a party that I didn't go to.
And you could come to the internet hardnuts lunch.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:43, Reply)
Where would you be travelling from?(
JeffTheDogFucker Can you dig it?, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:47,
Reply)
STV already sets an Natural % threshold and AMS can have an artificial one placed over it, as in Germany(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:26, Reply)
PR for all levels of Government is great in theory but pish in practice.Having a list based MP removes accountability to the electorate, a need to engage with local issues and separates Legislature level representation from grass roots level activism, arguably weakening the democratic model.
amirite?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:19, Reply)
Yep, which is why I'd prefer STV with 5 to 9 member seats.Or at least MMP/AMS
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:20, Reply)
So what type of PR do you advocate then?Surely you must realise that for all its faults, FPTP delivers accountable representation. Which is the point of a representative democracy.
You're 16 right? Can we not discuss DnB, or video games or skateboarding or something?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:23, Reply)
I don't think FPTP delivers representation that is particularly accountablesince in reality you don't get to choose who your MP is, only which party your MP belongs to.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:27, Reply)
Woah Al, FPTP delivers exactly that.You vote for an individual at local level, not a party. When did you last vote?
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:44, Reply)
My point is that the party decides who is running in each constituencyBut also any constituency with a big split between several candidates delivers even less representation since the majority of people will likely cast votes for someone other than the one who goes on to "represent" them.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:51, Reply)
But it's a system where individuals campaign, and have their own platforms.Hence there is variation of views within parties- Ken Clarke is far further to the left than Osborne, for example.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:56, Reply)
I know thatbut I can't vote for Ken can I. I like the Dutch system where you can vote for either a party, or a person, or pretty much anything you like. And they have very high turnouts.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:04, Reply)
You can't vote for Ken unless you live in his constituency, no.Meh. I like PR on an intellectual level, but FPTP on a pragmatic level.
As long as there is party politics you'll always have to vote for someone who doesn't quite match your views, or stand yourself as an independent.
And that is just madness.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:10, Reply)
There are much better ways of having a constituency linkthan FPTP. In fact pretty much every other way is better than FPTP.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 22:17, Reply)
I am slightly torn on thisI can see the appeal of a PR system. If you have a country which has just over a third of people liking one party, just over a third liking another and just under a third liking a third, then you would think that the "fairest" way would be to make them work together in a way that satisfies most of them.
But the problem with a lack of a constituency link is one I also agree with which I why I liked the idea of every MP having to actually hold a majority of the votes or face some kind of run off a la AV or STV.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:23, Reply)
Precisely.For democracy to work from the ground up, there has to be a high degree of local engagement.
(, Tue 13 Sep 2011, 21:24, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread