UK Politics

[counter_violent]

FFS. Do you have any idea of Starmer's background and political beliefs? It doesn't seem like it. Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us on Sir Keir Starmer's Marxist beliefs.

He's a firm believer in, do as I say, not as I do.

Keir Starmer ‘beergate’ event was planned, leaked memo claims

Sir Keir last week suggested the meal, the subject of a police inquiry, had been a spontaneous event

www.standard.co.uk

 

[tomorton]

A problem with Keir Starmer as a potential leader of anything demanding personal beliefs of conscience is that he either states opposing personal beliefs at different times or he says nothing.

However, on Marxism and Communism he has thankfully been clear -

He wrote in Socialist Lawyer in 2021 that Marx was right in saying it was pointless to believe a change of society could only be achieved by arguing about fundamental rights. Marx's belief was of course in revolutionary change of the structure of society, not in its democratic development and future governance.

In a 2020 interview for the Guardian he stated he is a Socialist and argued in favour of common ownership (of the means of production) and others of its Marxian outcomes.

He has argued for the abolition of the Monarchy and for "participatory socialism based on democratic planning".

Surely his given name is recognisable?

etc. etc.

What conclusions concerning his core political beliefs can be drawn?

 

[alan5616]

Given that Labour will kick hypocrite Starmer out shortly over beergate, pray tell, who can form a govt apart from the Tories.

A mid-term kicking is par for the course, but means nothing at all. Lets see what happens at a general election !

Innocent until proven guilty, as they say. We'll find out soon enough.

What is more important is whether Johnson, and his criminal cabal, get more FPNs from the Met Police. I think that there's more in the pipeline. Johnson has, already, lied to Parliament and should have resigned. Let's see him try and excuse his wrongdoing should more FPNs get issued. Already, No.10 Downing St has more FPNs than any other address in the UK.

 

[Atilla]

They're all as useless as one another, IMO. What's needed is a complete re-think about how the country is run and how the people that run it are selected; few have sufficient intellect or integrity to do the job competently. Left / right politics is dead as far as I'm concerned, not least because all the main parties are pretty much in agreement on the big issues of the day. It's a total shit show: half of 'em (maybe more) can't even define what a woman is ffs!

I don't see the system changing anytime soon here on in the US.

Driving around Chelsea, Belgravia and Parliament, there is so much power and wealth invested, only those willing to forego human principles and toe the establishment line can ever be allowed to get elected. Too much is at stake to allow a complete stranger, champion of the people be allowed to get elected.

Democracy and freedom are just engineered notions for the masses imo.

Can you imagine some comedian being elected and then having eyes all over British interests around the globe and misdeeds that are planned. Hell will have to freeze over first.

 

[tomorton]

Innocent until proven guilty, as they say. We'll find out soon enough.

What is more important is whether Johnson, and his criminal cabal, get more FPNs from the Met Police. I think that there's more in the pipeline. Johnson has, already, lied to Parliament and should have resigned. Let's see him try and excuse his wrongdoing should more FPNs get issued. Already, No.10 Downing St has more FPNs than any other address in the UK.

We're in strange territory here.

Apparently its up to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards whether the PM misled Parliament or not.

If he did then he breached the Ministerial code of conduct. The Code isn't Law but the usual remedy is resignation (or sacking). The PM could decide to not resign and to face the political fall-out. This would be the stupidest thing he could do but I wouldn't put it past him. It would then be up to he Conservative MP's whether they sack him or face the political fall-out alongside him: and that would be the stupidest thing they could do - they might end up keeping Johnson in No.10 but losing their own seats. There's no way I see them risking losing their jobs for this buffoon.

If the Conservative MP's decide not to sack him, the local party associations might take action against the pro-Johnson MP's. If the party associations take no action, that would be the stupidest thing they could do and I can't see them putting themselves in the firing line for their imbecilic pro-Johnson local MP.

 

[timsk]

Some may watch this superb short Andrew Lawrence vid' and think it's mildly amusing satire from an edgy, alternative comedian. Others will conclude that it's a near perfect - nail on head - summary of the appalling state of affairs that we all find ourselves in. Either way, enjoy . . .

 

[Atilla]

Some may watch this superb short Andrew Lawrence vid' and think it's mildly amusing satire from an edgy, alternative comedian. Others will conclude that it's a near perfect - nail on head - summary of the appalling state of affairs that we all find ourselves in. Either way, enjoy . . .

Lib Dems for me.

The only solution and way forward.

 

[alan5616]

Today's announcement by the Met Police is astounding. Johnson was at several functions in 10 Downing St. Joe Public has been fined, repeatedly, for similar breaches. I didn't think that the UK could get any more corrupt under Johnson's premiership. I need a lay down in a darkened room.

 

[tomorton]

Today's announcement by the Met Police is astounding. Johnson was at several functions in 10 Downing St. Joe Public has been fined, repeatedly, for similar breaches. I didn't think that the UK could get any more corrupt under Johnson's premiership. I need a lay down in a darkened room.

We didn't need more fines to tell us that Johnson is a sorry apology for a Prime Minister.

As much as I hate to admit it, I have to have far more faith in the Metropolitan Police than in Boris Johnson.
Alright, its a low bar..........
But I won't believe the Met bent the law to help someone look good.

 

[alan5616]

 

[tomorton]

The British people are blessed in living in the cradle of parliamentary democracy and English Common Law. Whatever Boris Johnson says or does, our peculiar civilisation will get over it. We should not be tempted to throw out the trusted and effective systems supporting our culture and society merely because some people lacking in principles try to game the system to their advantage. That's not a fault of our institutions, its a fault of humankind.

As Churchill said, ".....it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried......". There is no doubt he believed this to be true.

 

[alan5616]

The British people are blessed in living in the cradle of parliamentary democracy and English Common Law. Whatever Boris Johnson says or does, our peculiar civilisation will get over it. We should not be tempted to throw out the trusted and effective systems supporting our culture and society merely because some people lacking in principles try to game the system to their advantage. That's not a fault of our institutions, its a fault of humankind.

As Churchill said, ".....it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried......". There is no doubt he believed this to be true.

It's long overdue that we made a change to our electoral system. Only two countries in Europe use a FPTP system to elect their government. Those two counties being us and Belarus (really!). Proportional representation is the preferred method by most of Europe.

I'm hoping that the leaders of the Labour Party, LibDems and Greens get together and realise they can make changes which will benefit our economy and the people.

 

[tomorton]

It's long overdue that we made a change to our electoral system. Only two countries in Europe use a FPTP system to elect their government. Those two counties being us and Belarus (really!). Proportional representation is the preferred method by most of Europe.

I'm hoping that the leaders of the Labour Party, LibDems and Greens get together and realise they can make changes which will benefit our economy and the people.

Nobody has ever produced the overwhelming clinching argument for this. Part of the problem is there multiple versions of PR voting systems and which one you get can strongly affect how your vote counts.

In UK General elections Labour has won almost 50% of these since 1945 so its hard to think they are being unfairly excluded from government by our voting system.

Aside from that, there are literally no economic changes that can benefit the UK from an alliance of the three more or less socialistic parties you mention.

 

[alan5616]

Nobody has ever produced the overwhelming clinching argument for this. Part of the problem is there multiple versions of PR voting systems and which one you get can strongly affect how your vote counts.

In UK General elections Labour has won almost 50% of these since 1945 so its hard to think they are being unfairly excluded from government by our voting system.

Aside from that, there are literally no economic changes that can benefit the UK from an alliance of the three more or less socialistic parties you mention.

It's not about the Labour Party. It, also concerns the LibDems (Whigs) and the Greens. If the UK is going to progress to enable a more equitable society, and green revolution, the 18th century Tories have to be confined to the pages of the history books.

 

[tomorton]

It's not about the Labour Party. It, also concerns the LibDems (Whigs) and the Greens. If the UK is going to progress to enable a more equitable society, and green revolution, the 18th century Tories have to be confined to the pages of the history books.

So what you really want is a voting system which is inherently biased, but biased against the party you do not support. Your intention seems to be to introduce a voting system to eliminate the possibility of the electorate electing a Conservative government.

That does not sound as if you are in favour of the most effective voting system for the true expression of the will of the people, more like you would like to see introduced any system which will damage the chances of a party you do not support. Bearing in mind that the electorate have voted about half the time since 1945 in favour of a Conservative government, it sounds like you wish to restrict their ability to vote in who they want, only to vote in who you want.

Sounds like you are not in favour of democracy.

 

[Atilla]

So what you really want is a voting system which is inherently biased, but biased against the party you do not support. Your intention seems to be to introduce a voting system to eliminate the possibility of the electorate electing a Conservative government.

That does not sound as if you are in favour of the most effective voting system for the true expression of the will of the people, more like you would like to see introduced any system which will damage the chances of a party you do not support. Bearing in mind that the electorate have voted about half the time since 1945 in favour of a Conservative government, it sounds like you wish to restrict their ability to vote in who they want, only to vote in who you want.

Sounds like you are not in favour of democracy.

All very confusing but didn't the Conservatives, realise they were going to lose power because UKIP was splitting their vote and thus to prevent Labour getting in they called Brexit referendum?

Politics is dog eat dog World. Cameron then threw himself onto his own sword and off he went.

UKIP got lost in the wilderness.

Labour lost voters to the Tories.


I reckon people are wise enough to make their own judgements and able to decide for themselves. I'm in favour of proportional representation. I don't see why it should be anything else.

I have voted for all three parties in my lifetime. Personally, I'm not fixed on any one party. I've moved from Tories to Labour to LibDems. Might be Green one day but they are scary at times.

 

[alan5616]

So what you really want is a voting system which is inherently biased, but biased against the party you do not support. Your intention seems to be to introduce a voting system to eliminate the possibility of the electorate electing a Conservative government.

That does not sound as if you are in favour of the most effective voting system for the true expression of the will of the people, more like you would like to see introduced any system which will damage the chances of a party you do not support. Bearing in mind that the electorate have voted about half the time since 1945 in favour of a Conservative government, it sounds like you wish to restrict their ability to vote in who they want, only to vote in who you want.

Sounds like you are not in favour of democracy.

It's the FPTP system which prevents democracy. At present, the ruling party (Conservatives) have an 80 seat majority yet, only received 44.7% of the total votes cast.

 

[counter_violent]

It's the FPTP system which prevents democracy. At present, the ruling party (Conservatives) have an 80 seat majority yet, only received 43% of the total votes cast.

Much better than Govt by committee. Just look at Europe 🤣🤣

 

[tomorton]

All very confusing but didn't the Conservatives, realise they were going to lose power because UKIP was splitting their vote and thus to prevent Labour getting in they called Brexit referendum?

Politics is dog eat dog World. Cameron then threw himself onto his own sword and off he went.

UKIP got lost in the wilderness.

Labour lost voters to the Tories.


I reckon people are wise enough to make their own judgements and able to decide for themselves. I'm in favour of proportional representation. I don't see why it should be anything else.

I have voted for all three parties in my lifetime. Personally, I'm not fixed on any one party. I've moved from Tories to Labour to LibDems. Might be Green one day but they are scary at times.

Correct. Even with the supposedly anti-Opposition pro-Conservative biased FPTP voting system Cameron felt weakened enough to call the Brexit Referendum. this also was FPTP, the result was a weakened Conservative Parliamentary presence and he resigned. None of which suggests that FPTP excludes Opposition political parties.

I think voters generally make good choices. However, as a shield against the tyranny of the mob (or their populist leaders) much of the UK's political structure is designed to moderate absolute democracy, it does not eliminate opposition.

 

[tomorton]

It's the FPTP system which prevents democracy. At present, the ruling party (Conservatives) have an 80 seat majority yet, only received 43% of the total votes cast.

This does not prove that FPTP is a failure, nor that PR would be better, nor that opposition parties are excluded from politics.

Do you have any hard evidence? Maybe from elsewhere across the world?