The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[Jonesy7211]

Rupa Huq has covered herself in glory. After what's been a positive few days for Labour it's all going to be overshadowed by the stupid comments she's been overheard saying about Kwasi Kwarteng.

Quote

Labour MP heard calling Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng ‘superficially’ black

Sir Keir Starmer was under pressure to suspend Rupa Huq.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rupa-huq-jake-berry-keir-starmer-kwasi-kwarteng-labour-b1028459.html

The Tory friends in the media are going to be all over this now, and it's such a shame.

[mrchnry]

Starmer is smashing it. 

[Swerbs]

That speech has given me hope.

[Panto_Villan]

4 hours ago, Davkaus said:

You're right it's arguably the main "benefit" of FPTP, but is it really one? Is it really democratic for a minority government to be given such an overwhelming landslide victory that they can do absolutely anything they want without any control from the rest of parliament? To me, enabling a tyranny of the minority is far from a benefit. If the elected government gets such a small mandate, perhaps they shouldn't be able to get too much done, other than things that they can form a concensus on, that just seems like democracy to me.

I think the only benefit of FPTP that I'm actually sold on is that you get the local candidate you voted for, whereas the alternatives with their ranked lists, etc, are far from ideal. The rest of the alleged benefits of FPTP seem distinctly undemocratic.

I do see where you’re coming from on this but personally I disagree. I’d much rather have two opposing political parties sending policy lurching from one side to the other every 5-10 years than the country running on autopilot and nothing new ever happening.

Given most parties can’t even form complete consensus within their own ranks I think multi-party legislation is just kinda unrealistic. And the incentives are skewed - say the Tories needed Lib Dem assistance to pass a climate bill, do you think the Lib Dems would do it, even if it were of value to the county? Probably not because they’d be accused of propping up a Tory government and spend another decade in the electoral wilderness.

Another example is the pension triple lock in Britain. Eventually some politician is going to have to take the very unpopular decision to deal with the endlessly rising costs this is causing, because it’s not fair for society. Building a multi-party coalition to do it? No chance. Nobody would have enough political capital under a PR system unless they win a massive plurality of the vote.

I know the US system isn’t dysfunctional because of PR, but the fact a president who won both chambers can’t just pass a law to reduce emissions and make abortion legal is crazy to me. Having politicians that can’t deal with things is asking for disaster in the long term imo. We no longer have the EU to make big decisions for us, either.

However at the same time I really don’t like the way with FPTP that new parties can’t emerge. When an election is Boris vs Corbyn you really see the limitations of that system too. No chance at all of a Macron figure sweeping to power, for example.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Panto_Villan

[PaulC]

Brilliant speech by Starmer and I agree with 99.9% of it. Down to Green energy, putting a stop to buying to let, The NHS. Wow!"

[AshVilla]

If it's too good to be true it usually is.

[NurembergVillan]

5 minutes ago, AshVilla said:

If it's too good to be true it usually is.

[HKP90]

I'm not a natural Labour voter, I vote on policy, but I just listened to Starmer, and I thought it was a brilliant speech. Absolutely smashed it. 

[HKP90]

The green energy growth stuff had me literally shouting 'yes!' in my car. 

[bickster]

20 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Given most parties can’t even form complete consensus within their own ranks I think multi-party legislation is just kinda unrealistic.

This ignores the effect a PR system will have over time on parties themselves. There will be far less broad church in each party, there will obviously be some but within a much narrower "ideological framework."

Taking the Labour Party as an example, there will absolutely be no need for 4th Internationalist Trotskyite entryists to ever join Labour. They can all quite happily sit in their nice little TUSC environment because, if they campaign across the country and get enough of the votes they will get some effective representation in their own right and a much better opportunity to further their aims. As it stands now that won't happen, TUSC will always be a minority with no representation etc, they are left with infiltration of another party as their only opportunity to effect change. With their own possible representation, they may even get to a stage where they can effect some meaningful change.

PR will naturally narrow the ideological imprint of all parties. The Tory Party will be no different. Those that left during the Brexit debates, the likes of Anna Soubry et al, formed a new party. It was always doomed to failure because of FPTP. FPTP absolutely prevents the formation of effective new parties with new fresh ideas

[Panto_Villan]

7 minutes ago, bickster said:

This ignores the effect a PR system will have over time on parties themselves. There will be far less broad church in each party, there will obviously be some but within a much narrower "ideological framework."

Taking the Labour Party as an example, there will absolutely be no need for 4th Internationalist Trotskyite entryists to ever join Labour. They can all quite happily sit in their nice little TUSC environment because, if they campaign across the country and get enough of the votes they will get some effective representation in their own right and a much better opportunity to further their aims. As it stands now that won't happen, TUSC will always be a minority with no representation etc, they are left with infiltration of another party as their only opportunity to effect change. With their own possible representation, they may even get to a stage where they can effect some meaningful change.

PR will naturally narrow the ideological imprint of all parties. The Tory Party will be no different. Those that left during the Brexit debates, the likes of Anna Soubry et al, formed a new party. It was always doomed to failure because of FPTP. FPTP absolutely prevents the formation of effective new parties with new fresh ideas

Yeah, I agree. I’m not necessarily a FPTP supporter, just pointing out that the system does have some advantages and PR has some disadvantages that I hadn’t seen discussed.

I voted against AV under the coalition when the Lib Dems had a vote on it, I think I’d vote differently today. While countries like Italy are a complete mess, moving away from FPTP seems the best way to prevent a US style polarisation of politics. An inflow of new ideas is probably necessary in the long term.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Panto_Villan

[Demitri_C]

2 hours ago, Jonesy7211 said:

Rupa Huq has covered herself in glory. After what's been a positive few days for Labour it's all going to be overshadowed by the stupid comments she's been overheard saying about Kwasi Kwarteng.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rupa-huq-jake-berry-keir-starmer-kwasi-kwarteng-labour-b1028459.html

The Tory friends in the media are going to be all over this now, and it's such a shame.

100% idiotic comments and behaviour. Why they have to be so thick is beyond me.

All they have to do is shut up and let truss destroy the tory party and its stuff like this that gives tories a glimmer of a chance

[Demitri_C]

That was a incredible speech by starmer. This is the turning point i think 

[fruitvilla]

1 hour ago, HKP90 said:

I'm not a natural Labour voter, I vote on policy, 

Apparently, you are doing it all wrong.  

[phily85]

Cant catch a break can he

First starts ripping Truss apart and the Queen dies 

Now makes an impressive speach and Russia blow up a gas pipe 

 

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, phily85 said:

and Russia blow up a gas pipe 

This hasn't happened

The Nord Stream pipe has ruptured, it was turned off anyway, which is probably why its ruptured

[blandy]

5 minutes ago, bickster said:

This hasn't happened

The Nord Stream pipe has ruptured, it was turned off anyway, which is probably why its ruptured

Both pipes. Sabotage thought likely. 
 

Quote

"It is difficult to imagine that it could be accidental," said Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen.

Fears of sabotage are rising after mysterious gas leaks were identified overnight on the Russian-operated Nord Stream pipelines.

Danish and Swedish authorities have issued navigation warnings after two leaks were detected on the Nord Stream 1 pipeline, which the Kremlin shut down earlier this month for an indefinite period of time in retaliation for Western sanctions.

"This is not a small crack. It's a really big hole," said the Danish Energy Agency.

The warnings came shortly after a separate gas leak was detected on a second pipeline, Nord Stream 2, a highly controversial project that was frozen by the German government days prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and never became operational.

https://apple.news/AKOm64AxwQrqwO53iUhR1YQ

[bickster]

20 minutes ago, blandy said:

Both pipes. Sabotage thought likely. 
 

https://apple.news/AKOm64AxwQrqwO53iUhR1YQ

Wow that’s developed as a story since the last time I looked at it

[MaVilla]

3 hours ago, Jonesy7211 said:

Rupa Huq has covered herself in glory. After what's been a positive few days for Labour it's all going to be overshadowed by the stupid comments she's been overheard saying about Kwasi Kwarteng.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rupa-huq-jake-berry-keir-starmer-kwasi-kwarteng-labour-b1028459.html

The Tory friends in the media are going to be all over this now, and it's such a shame.

for such a woke bunch, they are really lovely ppl, im shocked i say...shocked....

[Dodgyknees]

18 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

for such a woke bunch, they are really lovely ppl, im shocked i say...shocked....

Gotta love the term ”woke” as an insult.