UK Voters
No, that doesn't follow at all.SharpFish wrote:QUOTE (SharpFish @ Apr 9 2011, 09:11 PM) Well then why bother with individual representatives at all? Lets just give parties a block vote and trust them to act in the best national interest, yes?
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
A nation of people who only care about their own interests (and reps who only care about local interests) should sufficiently bog down government to the point where it doesn't do anything, preventing greater abuses.Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Apr 9 2011, 02:55 AM) This weirds me out btw.
The MPs job is to do what is best for the whole nation. It's a pretty miserable parliament if everybody is trying to fight for the local advantage of their homies, rather than looking out for the nation as a whole.
Because when they look out for the "nation as a whole" you get unsustainability of stupid programs.
"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles". Although I'd argue that it has nothing to do with the two-party system; the only effect that capital has on elections is the slow corruption of every political party involved. As such, an ideal political system means low entry barriers for new parties, allowing a new populist pro-labor underdog party to rise up every time the old one is co-opted. Otherwise you end up with something like the US, where both parties ultimately support capital and populist movements are simply absorbed into those rich political behemoths and successfully marginalized.SharpFish wrote:QUOTE (SharpFish @ Apr 8 2011, 02:04 PM) I'm suggesting that there is a fundamental tension between capital and labour, and that this fact is what causes the two part systemn to occur so widely. An attempt to make it go away by by artififical means will not alter this underlying tension, it will simply obscure it, and deny people the ability to act on it.
So yes, I AM saying it's better for democracy. Becuase otherwise you get a false consensus that refuses to look reality in the eye.
Camaro is such a hater.Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Apr 9 2011, 11:17 PM) A nation of people who only care about their own interests (and reps who only care about local interests) should sufficiently bog down government to the point where it doesn't do anything, preventing greater abuses.
Because when they look out for the "nation as a whole" you get unsustainability of stupid programs.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
If it's a fight they want...Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Apr 13 2011, 12:40 AM) "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles". Although I'd argue that it has nothing to do with the two-party system; the only effect that capital has on elections is the slow corruption of every political party involved. As such, an ideal political system means low entry barriers for new parties, allowing a new populist pro-labor underdog party to rise up every time the old one is co-opted. Otherwise you end up with something like the US, where both parties ultimately support capital and populist movements are simply absorbed into those rich political behemoths and successfully marginalized.
If it's a fight they want...
They came to the right place, raised up in the rat race
Rats have grown real fat now, got our eye on the cat's place
Know the gaps, sniff the traps, who's been up there in master's lap
Licking cream off his face
Ratty's eyes are ratty slits
As he sharpens up his razor teeth to match his razor wits
Allready honed bone-crunching as he sees how it all fits
The @#(!, the scum, the still-to-come
And therefore where he sits
In this...
- AOS3
From our prime minister
QUOTE Too often debates about AV are less like political arguments, and more like scientific discussions, where people get lost in a language of proportionality and preferences, probabilities and possibilities.
“Of course, some of these things are important. But for me, politics shouldn't be some mind-bending exercise," he added. "It's about how you feel in your gut, about the values you hold dear and the beliefs that you instinctively have.
"And I feel in my gut that AV is wrong."[/quote]
OMG the condescension in the above quote is staggering.
Is he seriously saying we shouldn't approach things rationally and give it some thought?
* notjarvis softly weeps for the state of British politics.
Edit
http://atomicspin.wordpress.com/2011/04/18...-need-evidence/
QUOTE Too often debates about AV are less like political arguments, and more like scientific discussions, where people get lost in a language of proportionality and preferences, probabilities and possibilities.
“Of course, some of these things are important. But for me, politics shouldn't be some mind-bending exercise," he added. "It's about how you feel in your gut, about the values you hold dear and the beliefs that you instinctively have.
"And I feel in my gut that AV is wrong."[/quote]
OMG the condescension in the above quote is staggering.
Is he seriously saying we shouldn't approach things rationally and give it some thought?
* notjarvis softly weeps for the state of British politics.
Edit
http://atomicspin.wordpress.com/2011/04/18...-need-evidence/
Last edited by notjarvis on Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
