Bolitics UKIP Nutters

[tonyh29]

perceived need for balance

jeesh

only those already in a position of power should be allowed to be in positions of power, if you've not previously broken into the virtuous circle of self interest, conservatism and protectionism then **** you, you clearly don't deserve it I have no interest in what it might turn out you can bring to the party

No he has a point , one I raised earlier , populist politics ... Women vote ergo stick a token women or two in the cabinet , we all know they aren't there on merit just there to get the chick vote .. We had an empire when women knew their place and sat at home and darned socks , it all went downhill once they got the vote ..

[snowychap]

So you want to dictate the makeup of parties that you are not interested in?

I really couldn't care what the make up of the cabinet is, so long as only elected MPs were in key positions, and that ministers are capable of doing their job.

Perhaps he would (but perhaps not also) - perhaps we should all want a much less homogeneous group as the executive? And perhaps we should wonder why and how that tends to be the case?

Your second line gets to the heart of the problem (and other problems): it's about this silly justification of 'meritocracy' (and for explanation of the silliness: how people claim to be worthy of their poisition just by having their position).

Edited May 30, 2014 by snowychap

[chrisp65]

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination, not trendy at the moment as the Sun / UKIP / Top Gear macho reactionary brigade currently hold sway

 

but we need to show everyone that they can contribute and their thinking matters

 

you can't tell girls in school or black guys or somebody from a sink estate 'you can be just like us' if 'us' is always always always 10 rich old white guys in £800 suits 

 

when the nearest thing to 'one of us' in politics Nigel Farage it's time to invest 10 years in getting a more representative cross section of society a go at making decisions

[snowychap]

No he has a point

No, he really doesn't.

There may be a point galumphing around there but unless we realize there is a difference between some ideal (i.e. where people don't draw benefits because of other things than their ability only) and wot goes on (e.g. that all sorts of things influence people's positions including gender, luck, class, associations, looks, not living in Surrey, not driving Fords, not deifying Queen, &c.) then the 'tree hugging' rhetoric of people wanting to talk about meritocracy is empty stuff.

[NurembergVillan]

Completely agree with Chris.

 

This'll probably sound rubbish and I'll get panned for it but I'm going for it anyway.

 

I remember the hope of New Labour.  I was 18 when they came into power, and seeing the likes of Noel Gallagher walk into Downing St made me think that, after a lifetime of Thatcher and Major, there might be a Government that were seeking insight into things that affect me.

 

Over time, of course, it didn't really work out that way.  But you have to wonder, or I have to wonder, whether the likes of Noel, Russell Brand, reformed gang members, social workers at the coal face, single mothers couldn't actually contribute.  Shouldn't there be focus groups or some sort of way of having people like that influence policy.

 

I'm in my mid-30s, I earn decent money, I've got a job that I've had to train and work hard for, and I look at the leaders of all the parties and think they're a load of bell ends.  How on earth is my 20 year old niece who lives on a council estate going to relate to anything they're saying, particularly when they deliver it in the most convoluted ways possible?

[snowychap]

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination

Why would you think that 'positive discrimination' would address half the issues that the rest of your post implies?

It would appear to be an internal 'liberal intervention' and would, by its nature, fail to even want to consider the real problems or even some of the implications of those problems.

[tonyh29]

Completely agree with Chris.

This'll probably sound rubbish and I'll get panned for it but I'm going for it anyway.

I remember the hope of New Labour. I was 18 when they came into power, and seeing the likes of Noel Gallagher walk into Downing St made me think that, after a lifetime of Thatcher and Major, there might be a Government that were seeking insight into things that affect me.

Over time, of course, it didn't really work out that way. But you have to wonder, or I have to wonder, whether the likes of Noel, Russell Brand, reformed gang members, social workers at the coal face, single mothers couldn't actually contribute. Shouldn't there be focus groups or some sort of way of having people like that influence policy.

I'm in my mid-30s, I earn decent money, I've got a job that I've had to train and work hard for, and I look at the leaders of all the parties and think they're a load of bell ends. How on earth is my 20 year old niece who lives on a council estate going to relate to anything they're saying, particularly when they deliver it in the most convoluted ways possible?

You had me right up to Russell Brand

Personally I'd rather have my PM gone to Eton than being some pseudo intellectual with a fake cockney accent

Edited May 30, 2014 by tonyh29

[NurembergVillan]

That was the bit I knew I'd get panned for.

 

You can filter out the rest if you want, but the underlying message is that the current system is broken and we're missing the point on how modern society functions.

 

If we're including drugs and the sex trade in our GDP then we need to address everything about modern society, not just the bits that suit the establishment.

Edited May 30, 2014 by NurembergVillan

[tonyh29]

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination, not trendy at the moment as the Sun / UKIP / Top Gear macho reactionary brigade currently hold sway

but we need to show everyone that they can contribute and their thinking matters

you can't tell girls in school or black guys or somebody from a sink estate 'you can be just like us' if 'us' is always always always 10 rich old white guys in £800 suits

when the nearest thing to 'one of us' in politics Nigel Farage it's time to invest 10 years in getting a more representative cross section of society a go at making decisions

You're almost giving the politician " hard working ordinary people" line there Edited May 30, 2014 by tonyh29

[snowychap]

How on earth is my 20 year old niece who lives on a council estate going to relate to anything they're saying...

Firstly, why should the fact that she lives on a council estate have any bearing?

Secondly, why should she have to relate to what anyone is saying to her? Couldn't she decide to say something for herself?

Of course she could and it could involve violence or some extreme form of civil disobedience but then we'd have a media blackwash about how **** awful that was and didn't we know just how lucky we all were with our playstations; smartphones; HS2s; holidays to Benidorm; Premier League football; indoor lavs; central heating; welfare state, and wotnot.

Her lot isn't going to be improved by Mr P's positive discrimination (whether it's a good means or a bad): it's either going to be improved by fortune (she digs her way out of the poor prospects and that may have much less to do with 'hard work' than the folk out there would want us to believe) or by a big change in universal circumstances.

[thetrees]

My point was that if they are good enough, I don't care what sex, race or colour that they are. The reality is that a cabinet will have a mixture of people, because there are always capable people from all walks of life.

I certainly don't subscribe to the misrepresentation as chrisp spun it.

The only thing that I find objectionable is unelected people assuming huge power, something that Mandelsson and Campbell did in the last Labour government. (And I am sure that there may be similar in the coalition, but certainly not so prominent)

[chrisp65]

 

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination

Why would you think that 'positive discrimination' would address half the issues that the rest of your post implies?

It would appear to be an internal 'liberal intervention' and would, by its nature, fail to even want to consider the real problems or even some of the implications of those problems.

 

 

I don't think it would be a cure, I think it would be part of acknowledging a problem and working towards fixing it along with lots of other stuff.

 

It would be as much a liberal intervention as ensuring people that didn't go to Eton get an occassional go at choosing the direction of the love bus we're all on.

[NurembergVillan]

Firstly, the fact that she lives on a council estate means that she has had very different influences and experiences growing up than, say, NIgel Farage or David Cameron.  It doesn't make her any less able, or ambitious, or less of a good person.  But it's shaped the way she views the world.

 

Secondly, I'm not sure I really understand what you're getting at with that.  She's not about to run for Prime Minister, but she's got the right to vote for one.  If she can't relate to any of the candidates, or why their policies are what they or, or how those policies and personalities represent her then she's going to be disaffected and disinterested in politics and voting.

 

As my first lengthy posted suggested, we need to find a way of engaging and representing the younger generation and not just those who go to private school.  At what point do the "voting generation" die out and the electoral turnout hits about 10%?

[tonyh29]

That was the bit I knew I'd get panned for.

You can filter out the rest if you want, but the underlying message is that the current system is broken and we're missing the point on how modern society functions.

If we're including drugs and the sex trade in our GDP then we need to address everything about modern society, not just the bits that suit the establishment.

But who do you trust to put it right ? Someone from Villatalk who would go like the rest of them as soon as he got the keys to the office and an expense account ? You've read animal farm , you know how it plays out

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

For the time being I think there has to be a degree of positive discrimination, because we live in a society that has structured itself to favour one group (white middle class males) over the rest.

 

That white males find this notion objectionable is unsurprising

[snowychap]

It would be as much a liberal intervention as ensuring people that didn't go to Eton get an occassional go at choosing the direction of the love bus we're all on.

Exactly. Only Blairities would have us believe that we were on a love bus.

[chrisp65]

 

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination, not trendy at the moment as the Sun / UKIP / Top Gear macho reactionary brigade currently hold sway

but we need to show everyone that they can contribute and their thinking matters

you can't tell girls in school or black guys or somebody from a sink estate 'you can be just like us' if 'us' is always always always 10 rich old white guys in £800 suits

when the nearest thing to 'one of us' in politics Nigel Farage it's time to invest 10 years in getting a more representative cross section of society a go at making decisions

You're almost giving the politician " hard working ordinary people" line there

 

 

I can honestly say that never occurred to me. Quite the opposite, shouldn't give people the opportunity to say they're not involved. Make everyone work a bit harder / smarter and not just accept that 'the man' will always win.

[tonyh29]

hmmm I'm pro positive discrimination

Why would you think that 'positive discrimination' would address half the issues that the rest of your post implies?

It would appear to be an internal 'liberal intervention' and would, by its nature, fail to even want to consider the real problems or even some of the implications of those problems.

I don't think it would be a cure, I think it would be part of acknowledging a problem and working towards fixing it along with lots of other stuff.

It would be as much a liberal intervention as ensuring people that didn't go to Eton get an occassional go at choosing the direction of the love bus we're all on.

Never realised John Major went to Eton

[chrisp65]

 

It would be as much a liberal intervention as ensuring people that didn't go to Eton get an occassional go at choosing the direction of the love bus we're all on.

Exactly. Only Blairities would have us believe that we were on a love bus.

 

 

Hey, if there's no love bus then there's no point. You can come and sit on my love bus for a while.

[NurembergVillan]

This is the trouble with politics you see.  People that are truly into it will look for tiny holes in the other person's argument rather than look for common ground and the over arching sentiment.

 

No wonder most people in this country, and many others, don't give a toss any more.