chrisp65 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 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 I think we're getting a bit literal and selective. One swallow does not a slapper make. Over the last 50 years or 100 years or 200 years I'd say a disproportionate proportion of the leaders have been posh people with posh people agendas pushed to the top by other posh people with the same agenda. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 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. I think it's known as opposition for oppositions sake Politics is too tribal but no idea how you solve that , a house of indies would be even worse I'd imagine ? hmmm I'm pro positive discriminationWhy 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 I think we're getting a bit literal and selective. One swallow does not a slapper make. Over the last 50 years or 100 years or 200 years I'd say a disproportionate proportion of the leaders have been posh people with posh people agendas pushed to the top by other posh people with the same agenda. You say that like its a bad thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) 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.If you don't change the structure of society then what the bleeding hell will a 'degree of positive discrimination' do?It's like brushing yer teeth with sensodyne toothpaste while guzzling 5 litres of effing coke a day. That white males find this notion objectionable is unsurprising I struggle with it for its means and its efficacy not for the impact upon me (I'm at the bottom already). Quit with the rest: there's a risk of making you look what you are not. Edited May 30, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 I like Villa. Can I vote for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) 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.The reason that people have to look for tiny holes in the arguments of others is because that's the only way to set themselves apart in the eyes of the elctorate.Most parties (and even the 'groundbreaking UKIPs') share most policies (Overton window boredom) and those policies and the parameters by which they are constrained are dictated by the electorate.Most people don't care any more, I hope, because they understand that what they vote for means sod all (in terms of things enacted). They just have to take the next step but this is England so we won't. Edited May 31, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 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%? As I have often alluded to on here, we need to find a way of engaging with people from all walks of life, rather than shout them down or call them names because of their misguided views. Unfortunately, if VT is anything to go by, those who are completely partisan are not interested in engaging in debate, nor even trying to see the other person's point of view, so there isn't much chance really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 I don't think there are that many on here that are genuinely partisan are there? I know there's the regular chat back and forth about the lefty gang. But I don't think there are any two with the same views, I don't think there are many that tow the Labour line. Which is probably the tories best hope at the next election, squabbling amongst the morally superior letting them in again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) 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.Which is the standard representation of 'things are fine, leave well alone' because 'they've got there so they must be capable' idea.I certainly don't subscribe to the misrepresentation as chrisp spun it.Because you subscribe to the self affirming 'they must be worthy because they are there' (and they couldn't get there if they weren't worthy) nonsense.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)The only thing you find objectionable is that?Sorry, Lawrence, you're not coming across as though you even want to talk or engage. Edited May 31, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 If you don't change the structure of society then what the bleeding hell will a 'degree of positive discrimination' do? Help change the structure from within. That much should be obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baselayers Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Whats a UKIP? some sort of new sleep aid? FU politics. Boring bullshit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Help change the structure from within. That much should be obvious.What should be 'obvious' is that it requires more than a reaffirmation of an apparently existng position to address a structural societal problem.You're smarter than a mere retort to justify your position: so, do you have anything to suggest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 FU politics. Boring bullshit!Before fame, fortune and private insurance, did any of our Olympic medallists receive treatment on the NHS (at whatever age)?Did that treatment help them to get their medals?Did bollitics have any bearing on the treatment they received? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baselayers Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 I'm not doubting the use and good things politics bring, but come on it's not interesting is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) I'm not doubting the use and good things politics bring, but come on it's not interesting is it?It would appear to be very, very interesting to any of those who lose their funding. Edited May 31, 2014 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) Whether intentional or not Baselayers is making a brilliantly subtle point. So many people of a certain demographic are disinterested in politics and I put it down to politicians being so utterly out of touch. Caroline Lucas comes from an activist background, when she talks she sounds genuine. But she's rare, 99% of them are 'career' politicians and businessmen. We need a good mix of genders, and ages and so on, but most importantly we need people in politics that are there for the right reason - to serve the people, not themselves. Edited May 31, 2014 by Kingfisher 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Whether intentional or not Baselayers is making a brilliantly subtle point. So many people of a certain demographic are disinterested in politics and I put it down to politicians being so utterly out of touch. Caroline Lucas comes from an activist background, when she talks she sounds genuine. But she's rare, 99% of them are 'career' politicians and businessmen. We need a good mix of genders, and ages and so on, but most importantly we need people in politics that are there for the right reason - to serve the people, not themselves. I agree with you, except the 99% bit, and your notion, whether intended or not, that you need to come from an 'activist background' to 'care'. I would contest that there are more than 7 MPs who are there for the right reasons, and that there are good, bad and indifferent MPs from all political parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Business is over represented. We need more politicians for people, less stereotypical grey men in suits looking after business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Business is over represented. We need more politicians for people, less stereotypical grey men in suits looking after business. Of course, government is 'business', so it does help if there is some business experience in the cabinet, particularly in terms of the economy. Should I assume that, in your judgement, people in business cannot be 'for the people'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Business is over represented. We need more politicians for people, less stereotypical grey men in suits looking after business. Less bellends using the House of Commons as a schoolyard to poke jokes at one another too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Business is over represented. We need more politicians for people, less stereotypical grey men in suits looking after business. Of course, government is 'business', so it does help if there is some business experience in the cabinet, particularly in terms of the economy. Should I assume that, in your judgement, people in business cannot be 'for the people'?We need balance. This political over representation of business leads to slogans such as 'hard working families', like working hard is some kind of virtue we should all aspire to. Politicians say things like 'the number of hard working families has increased under our leadership' - like its something to boast. No! People want a healthy work life balance. Most people realise life is short and we want to spend it working less hard, working less hours and doing the things that really matter - spending time enjoying life with our families and friends. This is just one example of why politics is on another planet, planet business, and why we need people from varied backgrounds representing us. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts