The almost total blackout on broadcast media of the police attack on the popular protest by thousands outside Downing Street – with 30 injured and 17 arrests – is in stark contrast to the wall to wall coverage of the staged fake “riot” in Glasgow in which 6 people were slightly rude to Jim Murphy with no arrests and no injuries.
Thanks to the UK’s appalling electoral system, we now have a seriously right wing government with absolute power from an absolute parliamentary majority, but which 63% of voters voted against, and which was supported by only 23% of those eligible to vote. Many of the 38% who did not vote at all, were not apathetic but actively disgusted by a corrupt political system which offers little meaningful choice in most of the UK.
Legitimacy is a different question to legality. The government is undoubtedly legal under the current rotten system, but its legitimacy is a different question entirely. Legitimacy lies on the popular consent of the governed. With an extreme government supported by only 23% of the population, actively planning to inflict actual harm on many more than 23% of the population, there are legitimate philosophical questions to be asked about the right of the government to rule. With so many, particularly but not exclusively young people, now reading sources like this one and not being enthralled by the mainstream media, today’s protest is but a start.
A lot of expensive millinery currently showing at St Paul’s Cathedral. Plenty of medals being worn by the male royals.
They are ‘remembering’. They are actually celebrating militarism and war.
Commentators who want the electoral system changed are ignoring the fact that, had we had PR of some kind, some 80 or so racist, far right members of UKIP would have been elected. In alliance with the Tories (who would still have been the largest party) we would have had an even more grotesquely nasty government emerging (but one which genuinely reflected popular sentiment, sadly). Be careful what you wish for. The problem lies far deeper, and would require electoral reform, reform of the media and the formation of credible and committed real parties prepared to lead from the left (not spinelessly court global capital) to solve it.
Looking at the chances of bi-elections. There were 21 in the last 5 years. Six died – but all were Labour. That might mean Tories don’t die in office. Or it might mean its their turn…
“They are ‘remembering’. They are actually celebrating militarism and war.”
Has memory become politically incorrect? Or is there no room for other interpretations of remembrance?
After Waterloo, Wellington was quite anti-war, as are most old soldiers. But those who don’t fight are free to celebrate bloodshed, like the feminists who celebrate abortion.
Briar – I made that point but qualified it by saying “Under PR AND WITH THE SAME VOTES CAST”. Voting behaviour would change with PR. People wouldn’t have to vote tactically in marginals anymore. People might want to turn out cause there was a point. And so on.
I would think that “VE Day” did not feel like much of a “victory” for those who had lost sons, fathers, brothers, daughters, sisters and mothers, or some or all of the above, during World War Two, on all sides.
I have no problem with the commemoration of peace. I would regard that as a more appropriate name, for the contemplation of such an unspeakable tragedy.
Kind regards,
John
(Aside: I’ve asked Craig/mods to delete Tony Opmoc’s comment above Jews and Americans above).
Mods, would you please remove Jon, he’s a bigot!!!
kailyard rules 10 May, 2015 – 10:18 am : “Regarding the defacement of the war memorial. Is there proven identity of the culprit/s?”
Nobody has been arrested, no witnesses have come forward, there is no CCTV video of the incident and nobody has claimed responsibility. But put your mind at rest, the mystery is solved. The Daily Mail have used their super ESP powers to discover who dunnit. It was mindless hard-left activist thugs.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3074951/Socialist-siege-Downing-Street-Hard-left-activists-clash-police-following-David-Cameron-s-triumphant-return-Number-10.html
“Following your logic, Daniel, I suppose that Cameron will refuse to meet with the Irish ambassador because the Irish coalition parties also received fewer votes than UKIP.
Did it escape your notice that the SNP did not run candidates outside of Scotland, whereas UKIP ran almost a full slate in the much more populous UK (question mark)”
That’s a straw man argument. Scotland is part of the UK. We just had a UK General Election in which the SNP received less votes than UKIP. So all things being equal, why should Cameron feel obliged to concede any ground at all to either?
Jimmy, I think I should be perma-banned for being pro-gay, feminist, and pro-choice! I nearly have my Harridan badge now. Now where did I leave my lippy?
The truth is, Craig, Miliband did shift Labour a little to the left, just enough to make it unelectable, and he got wiped out for it. A truly left wing party is simply not electable in this country.
The little socialist utopia that the Scotch want to create is not viable without English money. Cameron will send you all the money you want for your welfare paradise and then sit back and watch as without opposition the SNP pisses it all down the drain. Then he’ll liquidate Scotland.
What blackout? It’s on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32678518
As for legitimacy, the government has been democratically elected. Therefore I regard it as legitimate. Violence during protests increase my sympathy for the government, not the protestors. I predict that the government will go ahead with its policies.
Briar
“Commentators who want the electoral system changed are ignoring the fact that, had we had PR of some kind, some 80 or so racist, far right members of UKIP would have been elected.”
Ah, so because you don’t approve of a party that you believe is racist and far-right (I don’t believe that – I don’t believe that wanting a reduction in immigration is racist or far right), you support an electoral system because it effectively blocks that party from having any influence. I’d suggest that it is you who is the fascist, Briar.
“…Now where did I leave my lippy?”
Perchance, in your boyfriend’s handbag; or your mother’s boudoir?
@Anon1 11:38 am
Outch!!!
” They are ‘remembering’. They are actually celebrating militarism and war. ”
You must’ve really been appalled by this then:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3074519/Putin-Tanks-rumble-Red-Square-Russia-stages-biggest-Victory-Day-military-parade-Western-leaders-stay-away.html
Odd you didn’t mention it…
Craig; Will Ms Sturgeon admit that her government has no mandate to pursue independence?
Node
“The Daily Mail have used their super ESP powers to discover who dunnit. It was mindless hard-left activist thugs.”
Well they’re wrong there. Mindless, yes, but mostly posh and privileged, pretend revolutionaries who will be voting Tory once they start paying taxes.
Mary, I don’t recommend Urban Dictionary as a good reference. It is very amusing though, in general.
Wikipedia is quite good on MRA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement). The term is not synonymous with MCP and is usually intended to be neutral – though some people regard the movement as so beset with misogyny that perhaps that is no longer the case.
The group “Fathers 4 Justice” here in the UK, which I broadly thought was correct (both in its views and its direct action) could be described as a positive example of MRA.
However, some MRA is an outcrop of the hard conservative/libertarian right, and thus is not always a single-issue platform at all. It is sometimes delivered with the baggage of total opposition to the welfare state, climate science denial, homophobia, and endorsement of unfettered American-style capitalism, and its analyses are seen through those lenses.
There are areas of genuine concern, raised on this site previously, about an over-diagnosis of hyperactivity in young boys, and the subsequent prescription of drugs. There are legitimate gender issues here, and I am sure a quick look would reveal plenty of sober analysis coming out of academia. However, where MRA groups get involved, it is sometimes hard for the media and wider public to take them seriously, because of the additional politics that are brought to the table.
I’m surprised that on-one mentioned any reservation about the results given the huge discrepancy between pools and actual (?) votes.
I am by no mean a specialist in election verification and statistical analysis but is everyone happy that this was a fair and honest process ?
Poor Jon is yet to learn that being a feminist is not going to get him laid.
Liz Kendall has apparently told the Sunday Times that Labour needs to appeal to the middle class so as to woo voters away from the Tories in England. I wonder if Blairite New Labour is about to make a come-back.
I wonder if Milliband the *elder* might be invited and interested in taking part 🙂
Anon1 10 May, 2015 – 11:57 am : “Well they’re wrong there. Mindless, yes, but mostly posh and privileged, pretend revolutionaries who will be voting Tory once they start paying taxes.”
STOP PRESS
Anon1 has used his super ESP powers to declare the real truth of who dunnit.
“So you think that now we’ve got a 100 per cent Tory government this should shake powerless young people up a bit and there’ll be some grand revolution, Craig? No, there won’t – they’ll be crushed as evidenced by the total media blackout and it’s the people who gave them a leg up into total power like you and your ‘marvellous’ chums here who gave them the mandate to do that to the proletariat. Good job, eh? – not!”
What kind of thought process gives rise to your assertion that blame for the failure of Labour in England be placed on the shoulders of the people of Scotland?
How dare the Scots have the temerity to vote for an anti-austerity party!
“Poor Jon is yet to learn that being a feminist is not going to get him laid.”
Maybe he has aspirations to become a sex toy:
http://juliagasper.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/first-lesbian-couple-to-marry-arrested.html
Anon,
That is an interesting, though entirely unsupported, opinion. Here are other possibilities for our joint consideration:
– Miliband did not come across as leader material
– The party is still paying the price for Blair and Brown (take your pick on issues)
– The media power of Murdoch etc helped scare people away from a Labour govt
I think in varying amounts I think all of those things are true. Also, if you look at the electoral change map (there’s a good one on the Telegraph), Labour lost to the SNP in Scotland, but the Lib Dems were trounced in England and their seats broadly went to the Tories, not Labour. So, whilst Labour have done badly, they have been a victim of electoral forces outside of their control.
If there is evidence of England having voted against Miliband’s small leftward shift, I am eager to see it, and to learn from it. But as it stands, I don’t see any such thing, and I think all of us – including you – should be willing to take a more evidence-based, less partisan approach to such matters.
(Happy to continue these conversations, incidentally – as I said on the other thread, I do not see any value in the trading of insults, which gets nobody anywhere.)
Thanks Anon, very good. Looking forward to a interesting, thoughtful and civil reply to my post about why Labour lost.
Well yes, Node, with thousands of mindless student union activists out for a good laugh, scrawling “Tory Scum” on every available surface, it stands to reason that one drunken idiot among them defaced a war memorial.
Or was it the secret services, or the aliens, or was the whole thing staged by crisis actors? Or was it in fact a hologram?
You decide.
Did you write that all by yourself or did someone write it for you?
The same brand of democracy as Karimov, Saddam, et al using the same arguments of majority vote! Kind of football score democracy.
So far as you prediction and forecasting goes, boy it is uncanny what else can you predict? This is the mindset that smacks of vacant expressions of the mims, as thought out thoughts!
=====
Jimmy I don’t know what your beef is mate, but as I explained earlier, the kind of feminist that is peppering this thread with rights of sexual deviants as a matter of politics and female supremacy as a matter of course is by no means a “feminist” these are fashionista legitimising nonsense and unconscious drivel in the way of distracting from real issues.
Feminist theory is one of fight against oppression and equality of men and women regardless of locality. Don’t let a bunch of crazed lunatics kill a perfectly good notion by burying it under tonnes of crap. Do your own research, and find out for yourself.
Note the active censorship of any verboten material while at the same time tolerance of the current two minutes hate that is immigrants, Muslims, and coloureds!
This coming from the same operative whom supports lgbt (sex,sex,sex,sex) what has anyone’s sexual proclivities to do with matters of policy?
==========
Briar if the racist were elected to the parliament and the full extent of the latent racism became an apparent and manifest trend, it would be a great event. The ugly face of the UK politics would be unmasked and its rotten, and stinking nature would be out in the open for everyone to see and make their own mind up. The racist count on remaining anonymous and in the background, because then they can destroy all that is decent without anyone noticing it.
These are not real protesters, just rich kids! Not real at all!
Anon1 just repeats a favourite daily mail slur, used against occupy and students protests in recent years. They find a kid of some privilege amongst the protestors and make a double page spread of it. Anything to undermine the very idea of a class system.
This is a disarming turn for establishment labelling of dissenters: heretics, witches, commies, terrorists…posh kids from the burbs. A cute little fifth form fifth column that just needs to grow up. No real protesters here!