Politics
- Thread starter SciFiBoy!
- Start date
fabio de lunatico
Claymore
It was in response to ayase's point that US has good levels of personal freedom (although a number of US states have, in fact, already banned or partially banned public smoking). My point was that you can't wait until someone is intentionally hurt to stop people acting irresponsibly.kupocake said:
Yeah, well, it won't kill you.
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
SundayMorningCall said:
Labour really are your best bet. For all the complaining people do about them, I think they are genuinely the best party in the UK. The Tories deserve the distrust they have engendered in many Brits, I think. Unlike the Tories, they are not a vehicle for the religious right (which, admittedly, is currently fairly weak in the UK, but is growing and the Conservative party is receptive or at least accommodating of it's message, where the Labour party is absolutely opposed to restrictions on abortion and stem cell research).
Especially during a time of recession, I think it's important to have a party who's ideals place them on the side of the people and not on the side of the rich. All of this "fiscal responsibility with a social conscience" stuff from the Conservatives is nonsense. George W. Bush tried to dress it up as "compassionate conservatism" and look how that turned out! I'm not saying Labour doesn't have it's problems (all political parties do), but when compared with the Conservatives or Conservatives Lite (The Lib Dems), they are by far and away the best choice. I only wish the Left was strong enough in Ireland to get into government.
ayase
State Alchemist
It ain't really fair or accurate to call the Lib Dems "Conservatives Light". They are still the most socially liberal of the major parties. They still believe in big government (tax & spend) though, which has always been my biggest problem with them. But democracy is all about picking the least worst, so that was why they always got my vote.
If they do however enter into a coalition government with the Tories after the next election (as has been rumored), I for one would never forgive them. To help the Tories into power would go against everything the party has stood for in recent years.
If they do however enter into a coalition government with the Tories after the next election (as has been rumored), I for one would never forgive them. To help the Tories into power would go against everything the party has stood for in recent years.
CitizenGeek said:
oh, epic lmfao, you think Labour are liberal? seriously, are you an MP or something, youre talking about the party that wanted 42 day detention without trial, id cards and now a national database of any and all communications, yeah, i think i will pass on that. if youre gonna call any party Conservative Light, then it should be Labour.
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
And you think the Conservative Party wouldn't have done all of that to combat terrorism? You don't think the Tories would have gone even further? Of course they would have. David Cameron is a self-proclaimed Zionist, as are most Tory MPs. I support the state of Israel and recognise it's right to exist, but to believe that the Jewish people were entitled to take this land from the Arabs who lived there is absurd and extremist. The Tories are an extremist party, Labour are not. Labour are liberal. Without Labour, there would be restrictions on abortion and stem cell research, no civil partnerships for gay couples and the welfare system would be under supported.
CitizenGeek said:
READ MY POST IN FULL, I DESPISE BOTH LABOUR AND THE CONSERVATIVES WITH A PASSION, THEY ARE BOTH RUBBISH WHEN IT COMES TO SOCIAL POLICY, EVEN ON ECONOMIC POLICY LABOUR HAVE ONLY RECCENTLY STARTED DOING ANYTHING THAT I THINK IS WORTHWHILE, I HATE CAMERON, IM PRO-CHOICE, IM PRO-GAY RIGHTS, IM PRO STEM CELL RESEARCH, IM PRO WELFARE, BUT LABOUR HAS TAKEN ONLY SMALL STEPS ON THOOSE ISSUES, THEY SHOULD BE DOING A HELL OF ALOT MORE, THEY ALSO HAVE OTHER POLICYS THAT ARE COMPLETLEY ILIBERAL AS I HAVE ALREADY STATED
ATM THE PARTYS RANK LIKE THIS IMO
1. Green Party (might vote for)
2. Liberal Democrats (very small chance i might vote for)
3. Labour (wont vote for)
4. Conservatives (id rather be shot than vote for)
It's pretty ironic how Blair is now Churchie La Femme because he couldn't possibly be so vocally god-led when he was in office as a Labour leader... but SMC is right to question calling them a 'liberal' party. The Conservatives could only really go further right after Labour's gradual repositioning.... but I've never overly disliked Labour. They're a kind of necessary evil.CitizenGeek said:
ayase
State Alchemist
I agree the Tories would have been less supportive of gay rights, but I don't think I've ever even heard a party line from them on abortion or stem cell research (and can't find one on their website either). Would be interested to know though.CitizenGeek said:
As for the welfare system however (Dare I go there? Yeeesss...) it's already a severed artery in the public finances, not to mention massively unfair. I know from experience (though not mine personally) that some people and familes who need a little extra money are entitled to a pathetic amount (and we're talking single figures here. How does £2 a week sound?) or are told to move into a smaller house where their teenage childen have to share a bedroom to save maybe £50 a month on rent so the government doesn't have to give them anything. While at the same time, any single parent with young children seemingly has anything and everything provided for them. Housing, money and then childcare if they choose to go back to work. And then people wonder why teenage pregnancies are so high amongst the poorest section of society.
:
ause for shocked and appalled gasp - that's the usual response at this point:: But if you can hold off inhaling for a second I'm not suggesting every single parent is mooching off the state - Just that it seems they are unfairly entitled to do so. A sensible system in my view would be one where people only think about having children if and when they can afford to finance a majority of their upbringing themselves. Nor am I calling for the dismantling of the welfare state, just a good shake up so that it really is fair to everyone - Families with any number of parents, couples married or not, and single people.
A lot of my views tend to get me labelled rather harshly when in reality I'm fairly laid back about it all. All I believe in at the end of the day is in individuals taking personal responsibilty for themselves and the State only intervening when absolutely necessary. I view the Government / Population relationship much like that of a parent and child. Taking decisions for people only leads them to become more and more dependant, and less and less able to look after themselves. Perhaps that's the goal of government anyway - complete control over everything. But that can't be good for humanity, as a whole or as individuals.
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
ayase said:
I've read a huge amount of articles and reports about the Conservative Party consistently undermining abortion rights and taking steps to reignite the fight over choice. Just Googling "Tory abortion" will get you many reports that prove that the Tories want to undermine the rights of women. Some of them are here, here and here. Some Tories go as far as to ask their collegues to "pray" for the abolition of abortion. This kind of religious extremism is massively dangerous. Anyone can see the immense damage caused by a powerful, radical religious right in America and it's important to ensure that doesn't happen in Europe and at the moment, the UK is the most vulnerable. The Labour Party is completely, unequivocally opposed to the insidious so-called "Pro-life" movement and all the nastiness that comes with that (namely, less tolerance, aggressive foreign policy, attacks on secularism and gay rights, etc.).
I understand your point and it's a fair argument to make that overtly generous government benefits and such disincentivises social responsibility. That said, the Labour party seems to be concernerned with dealing with this welfare state problem in a compassionate and effective way. I'm not entirely sure how the Tories intend to "fix" these problems but based on the party's behaviour in the 80s and early 90s, I can't imagine they would deal with it in a fair way.
I agree and I think educating poor people is probably the best way to deal with the problem of teenage pregnancies. Who would you trust more to supply proper education to poor people? The answer is obvious.
This is right-wing thought, so I assume you're voting Conservative?
kupocake said:
Well, if we're going to have this discussion on liberalism, then I think we should define it for the sake of this argument. Are we talking about social liberalism - as in, support for women's rights, gay rights, etc. Or are we talking about it in fiscal terms - as in, progressive taxation, classical liberal economics, etc.? In the first case, I think it's fairly obvious that Labour are indeed liberal. In the second case, I think Labour are once again 'liberal', though they claim to espouse socialist ideals.
All politics is a "necessary evil". One is never going to agree with the entire manifesto of a political party which always requires compromise.
ayase
State Alchemist
Those Tory abortion views are disturbing, but part of me wonders if they're just trying to court the religious vote to help them into power - Though that may be unlikely as the tiny minority they constitute in this country would hardly make it worth the bother. But that also makes it unlikely they would ever get their way against the majority of people who value their freedom. The people of Britain are pretty united against the religious right. 23% of British people claimed no religion of the last census (and that was before The God Delusion - I imagine it'll skyrocket next time) versus 14% in the US. Only 4% in Ireland though so I can understand you being worried.
Update: A BSA survey put the percentage of Britons claiming no religion as high as 46% by 2006.
Update: A BSA survey put the percentage of Britons claiming no religion as high as 46% by 2006.
At this point I don't trust any of the parties, major or otherwise. None of them seem willing to admit just how outdated and irrelevent our education system is, continuing to defend it and try to fix it with patches when what it needs is a full strip down rebuild. Blair was elected with his mantra of "Education, Education, Education" but all he accomplished was the new City Academy program, which has led to more inequality dependant on where you live, private meddling with public schools and even worse, more faith schools - which I don't think should be recieving any public money at all. If you want your children to be taught opinion rather than fact you should pay for it yourself.CitizenGeek said:
This has always been my problem with these labels. Go to America and Liberal usually means social liberal, but not economic liberal. Go to Australia and it means exactly the opposite. This is why I prefer to do away with the word as often as possible and use the terms which appear on the Nolan Chart or the Political compass. Right, Left, Libertarian and Authoritarian (or Totalitarian) are much more descriptive terms IMO.CitizenGeek said:
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
Labour are essentially a social democrat party. They gravitate towards socialist ideals, but also value capitalism. I think this is the best way to govern a country, so vote Labour!
Nevertheless, the religious right is growing stronger in the UK and it is a worrying trend. Religion was, for a while, fairly non-powerful in American politics until Jimmy Carter decided to court the Evangelical vote and American politics are still largely dominated by the religious right. It was the Religious Right that put W. Bush in office two times, you know. If you really value freedom, then you should not trust the Tories who have given you no reason to trust them in the first place.
I agree entirely. The education system needs to be re-built, but that is going to take an enormous amount of pre-planning and research. Seriously, re-designing the entire education system is necessary, but it's not as easy as you seem to think. As such, these patches and band-aids are required for the time being, at least until we know exactly what improvements to make to the system. I think Labour are better positioned as a party to provide education for the masses (or at least try to get poor people into education) until we eventually know exactly how to fix it.
Yep, these labels are very confusing. I'd rather if people just used them right, though.
ayase said:
Nevertheless, the religious right is growing stronger in the UK and it is a worrying trend. Religion was, for a while, fairly non-powerful in American politics until Jimmy Carter decided to court the Evangelical vote and American politics are still largely dominated by the religious right. It was the Religious Right that put W. Bush in office two times, you know. If you really value freedom, then you should not trust the Tories who have given you no reason to trust them in the first place.
I agree entirely. The education system needs to be re-built, but that is going to take an enormous amount of pre-planning and research. Seriously, re-designing the entire education system is necessary, but it's not as easy as you seem to think. As such, these patches and band-aids are required for the time being, at least until we know exactly what improvements to make to the system. I think Labour are better positioned as a party to provide education for the masses (or at least try to get poor people into education) until we eventually know exactly how to fix it.
Yep, these labels are very confusing. I'd rather if people just used them right, though.
ayase
State Alchemist
I don't think I ever did say I trust the Tories... I'm certainly not about to vote for them now or ever (as I said in my first post on this thread, I will be voting Labour) but I am pretty much reconciled to the fact that they will win the next election. Cameron's learned (from Blair, ironically enough) that you just have to say loads of non-committal things the public wants to hear and you're away.
Even more interesting than the diagram you put up SundayMorningCall, is the one below it showing where the parties have stood at various times over the past half century:
I go halfway between Labour in 1972 and the bottom of the chart, so that's the closest any major UK party has ever been to my beliefs. From that position, they really do all look very similar. It fits in with what I though to be the case, that all the major parties are becoming more authoritarian and right leaning. Look at the Lib Dems go! I knew but didn't want to accept that they were shifting that way as well...
Even more interesting than the diagram you put up SundayMorningCall, is the one below it showing where the parties have stood at various times over the past half century:
I go halfway between Labour in 1972 and the bottom of the chart, so that's the closest any major UK party has ever been to my beliefs. From that position, they really do all look very similar. It fits in with what I though to be the case, that all the major parties are becoming more authoritarian and right leaning. Look at the Lib Dems go! I knew but didn't want to accept that they were shifting that way as well...
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
That's a pretty cool chart, ayase. After the 80s and Margaret Thatcher's rein of terror, I guess the Labour Party just couldn't be socialist anymore because the system was so fundamentally shifted to the right. They had to adapt their ideals to fit the new political climate, it seems. It's good to see them inching ever leftward again, I must admit. Neoliberalism had gotten us into this economic mess, so it's important we get far away from those kind of policies. Conservatives place neoliberalism at the base of their policy-making, Labour don't. So, again, it's better to go with the Labour party