Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Completely agree with everything apart from direct democracy being in theory the best system - Plato was right about direct democracy being the worst form of government and will inevitibly lead to tyrrany and many, many bad decisions.

 

Representative democracy where we elect experts but have the chance to kick them out if they mess up is tthe best form of government we undoubtably have come up with in practise and theory, but direct democracy really isn't a good idea and things like Brexit absolutely should not have been a public vote, just as the voting style reform shouldn't have been and just as the Irish abortion vote right now shouldn't be (as much as I'd like to see the latter two change).

 

Fair enough - to clarify I would think that direct democracy would be a good idea (certainly the purest in terms of everyone being able to equally have a say in society) if every human were longer-lived and also capable of considering the consequences of a decision beyond the end of their own life...but that's not really possible on any kind of scale now and probably never will be, sadly. So yeah, Plato probably had it right all that time ago.

[Wymsey]

Would be interesting to see, via a poll, who are quite left-wing and right-wing on here.

[Strokes]

36 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Wish the World Cup would hurry up and get here. Anyone know if and how you can ignore a thread?

I've been trying for weeks, if you have any success let me know.

[Strokes]

Just now, Wymeswold fox said:

Would be interesting to see, via a poll, who are quite left-wing and right-wing on here.

Its been done before, the conclusion was i am the most reasonsble and everybody else is an extremist nutter.

[Sharpe's Fox]

@Sampson is such an awful awful poster imo please leave the thread for great posters who want to discuss policy and maybe a few memes here and there 

[Guest]

It's a shame that those that love the current system have done nothing whilst one generation has screwed the environment, their kids chances of getting housing through by to let purchasing, decent pay by millions of self employed people paying any staff a pittance, screwed taxation by refusing to pay a sensible amount and screwed public services by continuously voting for lower taxes over society's needs.

 

Perhaps if that generation hadn't been such a greedy bunch of sods with no thought for tomorrow, their children wouldn't be trying to change the system.

[Rincewind]

Has anyone mentioned Boris Johnson What a buffoon. Houses of Parliament is the new Bedlam it seems. You have to smile at the lot of them. Worrying about it takes up too much time and stress. Nothing will change whoever is in power for the average working man/woman.

[Izzy]

7 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Worrying about it takes up too much time and stress. Nothing will change whoever is in power for the average working man/woman.

Pretty much my take on it all.

 

Let them get on with it and then just play whatever hand you’re dealt with best you can...

[bovril]

28 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Has anyone mentioned Boris Johnson What a buffoon. Houses of Parliament is the new Bedlam it seems. You have to smile at the lot of them. Worrying about it takes up too much time and stress. Nothing will change whoever is in power for the average working man/woman.

Complete and utter, unmitigated bollocks. This statement winds me up more than anything else posted on here, left or right. 

[Rincewind]

50 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Pretty much my take on it all.

 

Let them get on with it and then just play whatever hand you’re dealt with best you can...

Had many people say it to me. Its not just this this country. You just have to look at America and see who is in charge. Here we have a Foreign Secretary who discussed sensitive material with a complete stranger. What a joke. The majority have nothing in common with the likes of us. Voting is like walking on a bed of nails. It doesnt matter where you put your cross you still get a pr&&k.

[Guest]

May playing 'hide and seek' in Brexit talks, Barnier says

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/26/may-playing-hide-and-seek-brexit-talks-barnier-eu-chief-negotiator?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

[Webbo]

it makes you wonder why the Chartists and the Suffragettes  bothered. We should have just listened to the nobility and let our betters decide what's good for us.

 

Do the people complaining about democracy think they're too stupid to be allowed an opinion?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

it makes you wonder why the Chartists and the Suffragettes  bothered. We should have just listened to the nobility and let our betters decide what's good for.

 

Do the people complaining about democracy think they're too stupid to be allowed an opinion?

Not often I agree with you webbo but have a rep point 

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

it makes you wonder why the Chartists and the Suffragettes  bothered. We should have just listened to the nobility and let our betters decide what's good for us.

 

Do the people complaining about democracy think they're too stupid to be allowed an opinion?

Kinda curious regarding who this was directed at Webs seeing as no one has suggested that representative democracy be no longer used, rather that it is a flawed system that survives by merit of merely being better than what has come before it.

[bovril]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Kinda curious regarding who this was directed at Webs seeing as no one has suggested that representative democracy be no longer used, rather that it is a flawed system that survives by merit of merely being better than what has come before it.

Nah, it was just Rincewind with his usual "well they're all the same aren't they" bollocks. I understand some people off here have met him and claim he's a sound bloke but he seriously winds me up more than any other poster. 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

Complete and utter, unmitigated bollocks. This statement winds me up more than anything else posted on here, left or right. 

 

That's impressive. You've got rep points from Toddybad and Webbo. Must be a first! 

 

I'd rep you myself as I completely agree with your comment, but I don't want to destroy the rare and perfect symmetry of those rep points. 

 

Saying "not enough changes, whoever is in power" would be arguable as a claim, but saying "nothing will change, whoever is in power" is patent nonsense, I'm afraid, Ken.

Was there really no difference between the govts of Heath, Wilson/Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Blair/Brown, Tory/LD coalition & Cameron/May?

Would there really be no difference between a Corbyn majority, a May minority govt,  a Boris/Gove majority or a govt led by Vince Cable?

 

I think you've been on too many Mild Trails, @Rincewind 

[Buce]

22 minutes ago, bovril said:

Nah, it was just Rincewind with his usual "well they're all the same aren't they" bollocks. I understand some people off here have met him and claim he's a sound bloke but he seriously winds me up more than any other poster. 

 

Wow.

 

Of all the genuinely obnoxious cvnts that you could have chosen to be wound up by, you get wound up by someone as harmless as Rince.

 

Astonishing.

[Sharpe's Fox]

37 minutes ago, Webbo said:

it makes you wonder why the Chartists and the Suffragettes  bothered. We should have just listened to the nobility and let our betters decide what's good for us.

 

Do the people complaining about democracy think they're too stupid to be allowed an opinion?

Trouble is you're voting for Brexit hoping for more Thatcherism. Its kind of like Suffragettes marching to bring back witch trials.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Trouble is you're voting for Brexit hoping for more Thatcherism. Its kind of like Suffragettes marching to bring back witch trials.

I voted for Brexit so that we could have the govt we voted for. If that's Labour, which it will be on occasions, I can live with that. At least we can vote the useless twats out.

[Rincewind]

OK Maybe Alf is right in a way, there is not enough changes but basically nowadays they all shit in the same trough. Oxford/Cambridge same clubs etc. Look at someone like Rees Mogg. Like a bloke from the 19yh century. Lives in a country mansion. What does he know about struggling on a minimum wage? He voted for cuts in disabled benefits. I say they are basically the same in all parties because I do not want to be accused of being biased.

And that is why I rarely post here. I have no faith in politicians even those in the Party I vote for.

[urban.spaceman]

Another nail in the coffin for the Catholic Church in Ireland!!

[Rincewind]

Have MP's ever voted for a cut in salary for themselves?

[Wymsey]

5 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Have MP's ever voted for a cut in salary for themselves?

Tbh, why should they?

I'm sure some MP's deserve the salary they receive, based on how popular they are and try to take action on people's concerns in society,

[Buce]

15 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Have MP's ever voted for a cut in salary for themselves?

 

Probably not, as there wouldn't have been such a vote.

 

However, Labour MP Dave Nellist only took half his salary (a wage comparable to a skilled factory worker) during his 9 years as an MP, donating the remainder to good causes.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-23287778/dave-nellist-the-coventry-mp-who-gave-away-half-his-pay

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

But it doesn't matter whether it is market based or state based or collective based or there is no state or 100% state controlled - the core concept of Socialism is absolutely and always had been public ownership of the means of production and the core concept of Capitalism has always been the private ownership of the means of production.

 

Absolutely there are many ways you can do that and there have been many different ways that have been proposed to create both - but that absolutely is both the academic and politic definition which has defined both.

 

That has always been the accepted definition and core concept of Socialism and you'll find virtually every author until recent years say that - that isn't what I want it mean at all, that's what the revolutionaries of 1848 wnd everyone from Marx to Proudhon to Chomsky and every other influential Socialist thinker all wanted it to mean. If some populists like Bernie Sanders want to try and change the definition in modern times to seem more pallateable, that is both an incredibly dangerous thing to try and make the ideology more pallateable and the kind of shit Mussolini did with fascism. And I would be saying the same thing if people on here started calling Trump fascist or whatever- as much as I hate Trump you are sanitizing things which shouldn't be sanitised and it's dangerous.

 

I have no idea why you think I think Stalin murdering Trotsky has anything to do with that? I never said it did.

 

 

I mentioned Stalin and Trotsky to disprove your claim that "socialism has always meant one very simple thing". Stalin advocated "socialism in one country", Trotsky claimed there needed to be permanent international revolution.

Marx would have disagreed with both of them as he thought socialism could only develop out of advanced capitalist societies (not feudal nations like Russia), though he might have had a bit more time for Trotsky.

 

That's largely irrelevant, anyway, as most self-proclaimed socialists in recent decades have not been revolutionaries of any description. They tend to favour public ownership - or control - of a larger proportion of the means of production. But almost without exception, they support a mixed economy and parliamentary democracy. The French and Spanish Socialist Parties have run majority govts in their countries in recent decades and haven't taken all the means of production into public ownership.

When I was active in the Labour Party in the 1980s, a lot of members would have described themselves as "socialists", all of them believers in the mixed economy and none of them advocates of total public ownership. This wasn't something invented by Bernie Sanders in the last couple of years, as you seem to think.

 

I don't describe myself as a "socialist" precisely because it's such an ill-defined concept that means different things to different people. Much better to say what sort of policies you'd advocate or what sort of society or economy or democracy you'd want.

There's also the fact that, since the 80s, the Right has successfully associated the word with extremism and totalitarianism, so anyone using the word to younger generations not already politically involved risks alienating them from the outset.

 

As for your repeated claim that socialism simply boils down to public ownership of the means of production, I answered that with my Wiki quote. There's no point debating any further if you're just going to repeat simplistic claims in the face of clear evidence to the contrary........

"LCFC always play in pink and brown hoops"......"No, they mainly play in blue, here are photos of them in blue dating back decades"......"No, LCFC have absolutely and always had one simple kit: pink and brown hoops". No point, is there?