The Politics Thread

[Webbo]

Britain's not an extremist country, we'll never have demagogues here.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

Not sure this would make a good thread so I'll put it in here instead.

 

Your life in numbers

 

Basically type in where and when you were born and you can see how much life has improved in your lifetime. You can compare it to other countries as well.

 

47 minutes ago, davieG said:

Ageist it only goes back to 1960

 

"Your life in numbers" proves that things were so bad in the old days anyone born before 1960 is already dead, doesn't it, Davie?

I've only got a couple of years left myself! 

 

Quite a fun tool, but a rough one. It seems to suggest that people only got 7.1 years schooling when I was born. Kids weren't leaving school at 12 in 1962!

We're obviously lucky to have our level of democracy compared to some countries but claiming that the UK is perfectly democratic is pretty subjective, if not complacent.

Life expectancy and incomes have risen greatly, which is good, but there seems to be a lot of stress, insecurity and unhappiness, nonetheless....and the income figure is presumably the mean income, not the median, with the mean being dragged up by the big rise of wealth among the super-rich.

 

You'd never guess I'm actually a cheerful optimist from some of my posts today, would you?!  

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Britain's not an extremist country, we'll never have demagogues here.

 

 

I wouldn't be 100% sure on that.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

 

I wouldn't be 100% sure on that.

How far did he get?

[leicsmac]

Just now, Webbo said:

How far did he get?

Pretty far, as the picture shows, but not as far as the folks on the continent back then, and not as far as some demagogues overseas right now, thank goodness. But it does show that maverick demagogues of his type can and do arise in the UK and it's something to watch out for.

[davieG]

28 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

"Your life in numbers" proves that things were so bad in the old days anyone born before 1960 is already dead, doesn't it, Davie?

I've only got a couple of years left myself! 

Seems like that sometimes 

[Carl the Llama]

7 hours ago, Webbo said:

Not sure this would make a good thread so I'll put it in here instead.

 

Your life in numbers

 

Basically type in where and when you were born and you can see how much life has improved in your lifetime. You can compare it to other countries as well.

Glad I'm not at school anymore, it's gotten much meaner than when I was a kid.

[Guest MattP]

13 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Pretty far, as the picture shows, but not as far as the folks on the continent back then, and not as far as some demagogues overseas right now, thank goodness. But it does show that maverick demagogues of his type can and do arise in the UK and it's something to watch out for.

Pretty far? Posts like this make me cry, they didn't get pretty far at all, the way history has built these up is a stain on us all.

Let's stick to facts, even the BUF only claimed membership to have ever reached 50,000 (which is held up as a huge exaggerration by all historians), even if it were true that's less than the Green party has now.  their best every election result was a vote of 30,000 in 1931, to put that into context the Tories won that election with over 11,000,000.

 

We do our own country down enough already without now changing history to make ourselves sound like we were some hotbed of facism, that sort of politics has never been welcome here, it simply isn't in our nation, it's too protectionist for us, that's not what we are or have ever been.

The BUF comprised about 0.1% of the population over a period of less than a decade, why on earth you would choose to tar Britain as a nation that has seen a huge surge of fascism on the basis of that is beyond me.

[Alf Bentley]

19 minutes ago, MattP said:

Let's stick to facts, even the BUF only claimed membership to have ever reached 50,000 (which is held up as a huge exaggerration by all historians), even if it were true that's less than the Green party has now.  their best every election result was a vote of 30,000 in 1931, to put that into context the Tories won that election with over 11,000,000.

 

We do our own country down enough already without now changing history to make ourselves sound like we were some hotbed of facism, that sort of politics has never been welcome here, it simply isn't in our nation, it's too protectionist for us, that's not what we are or have ever been.

 

I just looked up Wiki for the electoral high watermarks of the NF and BNP:

- Oct 74: NF got 113,843 votes, standing in just 54 seats - 1265 votes per candidate

- 1979: NF got 191,719 votes, standing in just under half of all seats - 633 votes per candidate

- 2010: BNP got 563,743 votes, standing in just over half of all seats - 1668 votes per candidate or the support of 1 in every 50 voters

 

The BUF didn't take off like their equivalents in Germany or Italy. The NF and BNP didn't take off to anything like the same extent as Le Pen's Front National...but still attracted a fair bit of minority support, and did so WITHOUT a charismatic leader.

 

Just as Hitler and Mussolini rose up during turbulent times, the BUF, NF and BNP all achieved their little surges when economic times were tough, living standards struggling and politics chaotic: 1930s, 1970s & post-2008 crash.

Maybe everything will come up roses during Brexit, but if times are tough, that will represent very fertile ground for the rise of the Far Right. If living standards stagnate/fall, unemployment rises, public spending cuts resume, immigration is perceived to be continuing unabated, the Govt is perceived to have sold out on the Brexit settlement and/or a charismatic Far Right leader appears, that would be a toxic combination.

 

Most of that hasn't happened yet and might never happen, but there are clear risks. To claim that it "simply isn't in our nation" seems complacent. It might not be "what we are or have ever been", but it could be what we become. We're not so culturally superior as to be immune. I'm not anticipating some sort of Nazi takeover, but if times get tough and turbulent, it would be surprising if there is NOT a rise in the Far Right - and if they've any sense they'll try to take over UKIP as a vehicle to that end.

[leicsmac]

As always, Alf does the research and posting so I don't have to. 

[Jon the Hat]

We should keep an eye on the extremes of course, but with good education and a decent welfare system, we shouldn't be breeding that sort of bigotry in an y kind of numbers.

[Alf Bentley]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

As always, Alf does the research and posting so I don't have to. 

 

Well, it allows you more time to travel over land, sea and Trans-Siberian rail from Korea to England..... Hang on, I'm getting the worst of this deal, aren't I?! 

[leicsmac]

Just now, Alf Bentley said:

 

Well, it allows you more time to travel over land, sea and Trans-Siberian rail from Korea to England..... Hang on, I'm getting the worst of this deal, aren't I?! 

I guess it does. It was brilliant.

[Webbo]

Any Hitler type character would be laughed at in this country, we're too bolshy, sceptical and irreverent in this country to take people like that serious.

 

In reality people in this country have very little to complain about. Free health care, schooling. Average incomes are still rising, if only slowly.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

Any Hitler type character would be laughed at in this country, we're too bolshy, sceptical and irreverent in this country to take people like that serious.

 

In reality people in this country have very little to complain about. Free health care, schooling. Average incomes are still rising, if only slowly.

 

There may be some truth in what you say about British scepticism. I've always been proud that we never had an equivalent of a Le Pen regularly getting 15%-25% of the vote since the 80s.

Maybe we have a higher "cracking point" for falling into extremism...but we will have a cracking point. We're not inevitably immune to hysteria, as we saw when Princess Diana died.

 

There was an excellent report on Newsnight last night, interviewing people from Youngstown, Ohio (rust belt) who were supporting Trump (worth watching if it's on I-Player). They weren't idiots or wild extremists, just calm, everyday people who felt that their lives and prospects were pretty poor. So they were happy to vote for a loose cannon who promises to "make America great again", to build a wall to keep Mexicans out etc.

 

Compared to people in third world slums, we've nothing to complain about. Compared to 50 or 100 years ago in the UK, most of us have little complain about materially (socially or psychologically, maybe). But people don't compare their situation to the third world or to 100 years ago, they compare it to their expectations. I'm not talking about people with unreasonable expectations. A lot of people expected some security of income, the ability to buy a home and raise a family, some career prospects, a life without serious debt, rapid access to care when they get old/ill....and who feel those expectations are being disappointed. If that continues or gets worse, who's to say that people won't opt for a Trump or Le Pen, even if they're sceptical enough to resist a Hitler? 

[davieG]

10 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

There may be some truth in what you say about British scepticism. I've always been proud that we never had an equivalent of a Le Pen regularly getting 15%-25% of the vote since the 80s.

Maybe we have a higher "cracking point" for falling into extremism...but we will have a cracking point. We're not inevitably immune to hysteria, as we saw when Princess Diana died.

 

There was an excellent report on Newsnight last night, interviewing people from Youngstown, Ohio (rust belt) who were supporting Trump (worth watching if it's on I-Player). They weren't idiots or wild extremists, just calm, everyday people who felt that their lives and prospects were pretty poor. So they were happy to vote for a loose cannon who promises to "make America great again", to build a wall to keep Mexicans out etc.

 

Compared to people in third world slums, we've nothing to complain about. Compared to 50 or 100 years ago in the UK, most of us have little complain about materially (socially or psychologically, maybe). But people don't compare their situation to the third world or to 100 years ago, they compare it to their expectations. I'm not talking about people with unreasonable expectations. A lot of people expected some security of income, the ability to buy a home and raise a family, some career prospects, a life without serious debt, rapid access to care when they get old/ill....and who feel those expectations are being disappointed. If that continues or gets worse, who's to say that people won't opt for a Trump or Le Pen, even if they're sceptical enough to resist a Hitler? 

The dissolutioned appear to opting for Corbyn 

[Guest MattP]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I just looked up Wiki for the electoral high watermarks of the NF and BNP:

- Oct 74: NF got 113,843 votes, standing in just 54 seats - 1265 votes per candidate

- 1979: NF got 191,719 votes, standing in just under half of all seats - 633 votes per candidate

- 2010: BNP got 563,743 votes, standing in just over half of all seats - 1668 votes per candidate or the support of 1 in every 50 voters

 

The BUF didn't take off like their equivalents in Germany or Italy. The NF and BNP didn't take off to anything like the same extent as Le Pen's Front National...but still attracted a fair bit of minority support, and did so WITHOUT a charismatic leader.

 

Just as Hitler and Mussolini rose up during turbulent times, the BUF, NF and BNP all achieved their little surges when economic times were tough, living standards struggling and politics chaotic: 1930s, 1970s & post-2008 crash.

Maybe everything will come up roses during Brexit, but if times are tough, that will represent very fertile ground for the rise of the Far Right. If living standards stagnate/fall, unemployment rises, public spending cuts resume, immigration is perceived to be continuing unabated, the Govt is perceived to have sold out on the Brexit settlement and/or a charismatic Far Right leader appears, that would be a toxic combination.

 

Most of that hasn't happened yet and might never happen, but there are clear risks. To claim that it "simply isn't in our nation" seems complacent. It might not be "what we are or have ever been", but it could be what we become. We're not so culturally superior as to be immune. I'm not anticipating some sort of Nazi takeover, but if times get tough and turbulent, it would be surprising if there is NOT a rise in the Far Right - and if they've any sense they'll try to take over UKIP as a vehicle to that end.

I think that pretty much sums up, in a period where the far right were probably at their most "respectable" and a lot of people didn't even mind telling you they were voting for them they got the support of less than 2% of the population and that was when they were targetting seats where they thought they had a good chance of winning (so the actual number is lower). Le Pen's NF isn't fascist either, not to the extent of the parties you mention there.

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I speak to quite a few people who are right wing, none of them have ever shown any desire for a fascist party and I doubt we ever will, I agree the smart thing to do would be to railroad a party, but after what has happened to Labour over the last year I doubt any other major party will let that happen again.

 

 

[bovril]

There are certainly a lot of parallels between today's situation and the rise of extremism in the early 20th century. Especially in some of the vocabulary - the world is run by shadowy elites, experts are not to be trusted and anybody who agrees with them must be an 'educated liberal' who wants to protect their own privilege or, even worse, is a traitor. 

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

I think that pretty much sums up, in a period where the far right were probably at their most "respectable" and a lot of people didn't even mind telling you they were voting for them they got the support of less than 2% of the population and that was when they were targetting seats where they thought they had a good chance of winning (so the actual number is lower). Le Pen's NF isn't fascist either, not to the extent of the parties you mention there.

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I speak to quite a few people who are right wing, none of them have ever shown any desire for a fascist party and I doubt we ever will, I agree the smart thing to do would be to railroad a party, but after what has happened to Labour over the last year I doubt any other major party will let that happen again.

 

 

 

That's incorrect. In 2010, the BNP got 1.9% of ALL votes cast nationwide, despite only standing in just over half the seats.

 

If they'd stood in all the seats, they would obviously have got higher than 1.9% nationwide. As they stood in their strongest areas, they clearly wouldn't have managed another 1.9% in the other half....but about 2.5%-3% overall would be a reasonable guess.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

That's incorrect. In 2010, the BNP got 1.9% of ALL votes cast nationwide, despite only standing in just over half the seats.

 

If they'd stood in all the seats, they would obviously have got higher than 1.9% nationwide. As they stood in their strongest areas, they clearly wouldn't have managed another 1.9% in the other half....but about 2.5%-3% overall would be a reasonable guess.

Apologies.

[Alf Bentley]

Just now, MattP said:

Apologies.

 

No probs. Doesn't really change the substance of the issue. I just like being a pedant. 

[Webbo]

4 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

We're not inevitably immune to hysteria, as we saw when Princess Diana died.

 

 

Wasn't genuine though was it? I saw people on that Sunday morning asking what the fuss was about, it wasn't like the Queen had died, only for a week or 2 later to claim they were broken hearted. People don't act like that when things are important.

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Wasn't genuine though was it? I saw people on that Sunday morning asking what the fuss was about, it wasn't like the Queen had died, only for a week or 2 later to claim they were broken hearted. People don't act like that when things are important.

 

A different scenario, I agree, and a much more benign one.

 

What it does show is how a lot of people feel that they have to "go along with the crowd" if the critical mass gets big enough and they feel a certain attitude is expected. When the Nazis got going in 1930s Germany, it was only a small minority who were fanatical Nazis and a (more significant) minority who were prepared to vote for them....but once it became a powerful trend, a lot more people felt they had to go along with the crowd.

 

I'm not suggesting we're on the verge of a Nazi Britain - there's very little sign of that: no significant Far Right party, just a lot of dissatisfaction, a significant minority blaming foreigners and a slight increase in public abuse. But if times do get tougher due to an economic downturn or problems with public finances, that could build - and beyond a certain point, you could get a "snowball effect" where hostility to foreigners is the expected attitude in certain areas or among certain groups. Hopefully none of that will ever happen. I'm just saying that there is a risk. The climate could be ripe for it and we're not immune to such trends, however "bolshy, sceptical and irreverent" we might be (and I do partly accept that national characterisation).

[Strokes]

I kind of think as a nation we are probably more susceptible to extreme movements in the future. We can be quite daft and reactionary at times and as education fails (the public does seem quite stupid on a whole), as it is doing, we have as much chance of being taken in as any other nation. You only have to look at this whole Corbyn/momementum thing to see how the right message at the right time to the right people can be powerful.

hopefully it never happens but it would be silly to rule it out.

[Carl the Llama]

17 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I kind of think as a nation we are probably more susceptible to extreme movements in the future. We can be quite daft and reactionary at times and as education fails (the public does seem quite stupid on a whole), as it is doing, we have as much chance of being taken in as any other nation. You only have to look at this whole Corbyn/momementum thing to see how the right message at the right time to the right people can be powerful.

hopefully it never happens but it would be silly to rule it out.

I'd definitely say England's already a largely xenophobic nation.  Yes we're seeing it with the anti-Semites within modern labour, but we're also seeing it with the many kippers who vote UKIP as an anti-foreigner vote and also with the massive number of people who decided to vote to leave the EU under the carefully worded basis of 'regaining control' of our borders (unfortunately there are no figures to show how many people this was a key concern for).