Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Not really sure where I expect this thread to go, but I thought I'd post this up here, rather than derail one of a number of other threads.

You see, right now, I think I have lost all faith in Politics. Not to say I had much in the first place, but I had some.

The theory of Government in Britain is based on Policies and Manifesto's. In the run up to the General Election, the various Political Parties publish their manifesto, a list of promises for the forthcoming Political Term as to what new laws they intend to introduce, taxation plans etc. This is then meant to be digested by the voters, so they can then go and vote for which Party they feel has the best deal for them as a individual.

Yet, Party Politics ruins this utterly. I believe it was in a Blackadder episode where the immortal words 'You could stick a Blue Ribbon (Blue is the Party Colour for the Conservative or 'Tory' Party in the UK) on a Hatstand and they'd elect it'. And it's not just the Tories, it's Labour too.

Once upon a time, I believe, we might have had a proper Party system. But now, it doesn't seem to matter. Because the Big Two (Labour and Conservatives) can arguably count on so many seats, it's like they don't even bother. Somewhere along the line, it became a popularity contest between the two Leaders. Who gives a toss about Policies when X is better at Y than Z. So what if Gordon Brown has a face like a sad face painted on a scrotum (thank you Frankie Boyle!) what *I* want to know is exactly what the Labour PArty, Tory Party, Lib Dems et al are offering *me*.

Yet because Politics has, in my opinion, devolved into a bloody Circus, I can't find out. The media takes sides as if the Papers were Backbenchers. Nothing is given without someone putting spin on it.

So how do they expect me to vote, when I don't know what I am voting on? Take the Euro. All I have heard are bad things about it. Yet it seems to be doing the countries that adopted it absolutely no harm. Indeed, in the current financial climate, it seems to be doing really rather well. But at no point has any Political Party, MP or Politician offered to give me hard facts about it. I, like the rest of the Electorate at large, are being kept in the dark.

Guess I'll be spoiling my voting paper for the forseeable future.

Thankyou for reading my little rant.

Politics suck. Blackadder is awesome.

The right wing papers in the UK are ridiculously bad for anti EU spin. A lot of the time they just tell outright lies.
What's worse is that they are exporting their particular brand of "journalism" into the republic. We get a paper printed in Ireland, with maybe 10% content switched out for irish orientated stuff, and the rest is all UK news. Sadly, they are the most read papers over here, and slowly irish people, who used to be amongst the most pro-EU are picking up xenophobic Euroskeptic veiws more commonly seen in the british conservative party (traditionally no friend of the Irish)

As for UK politics, yeah it is depressing as hell. The Lib Dems are just a bunch of loo lahs from what I can tell, and New Labour = gak, Tories = Idiots. Really, you don't have a good option.
Over here we have two main parties (Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael) who are pretty similar and centrist. They differ on one or two issues but are mostly divided by old Civil War lines. Then we have a bunch of smaller parties, in order of biggest to smallest they are:
Labour (Left of centre/Trade Unionists. Don't like them because trade unions are way too powerful in Ireland and are hamstringing us in terms of competativeness)
Greens (Currently in a coalition government with Fianna Fáil. General environmental policies, don't like them because many of their policies are irrelevant or unrealistic (and I say this as an environmentally concious ecologist))
Progressive Democrats (God I hate these guys. Currently, and for the last 10 years, in coalition with FF for government. Right wing, hyper capitalist. Like to sell off state owned assets like telecommunications, transport and electricity to their friends for cheap, resulting in massive inefficiency and wastage. They are the sole reason we are having difficulty competing in many feilds. I fething hate them. Currently want to privatise our healthcare system, the fethers.)
Sinn Féin (Republican nutjobs. Nominally socialist, but only because that's what appeals to the poorer inner city types that vote for them. Generally no one will ally with them because of the stigma associated with the IRA)

So we generally have a coalition government, which I like, but it tends to be pretty all over the place, which I don't as much. Currently the centrist FF, lefty Greens and right wing PDs are in power. To be honest, they seem to be doing OK, mostly because the PDs have lost tonnes of power and popularity as people realised that a country like Ireland can't be run like the US.

Lib Dems have done a lot of good things in the Scottish Parliament, where they formed a Coalition with Labour.

Free Childcare, Free Homcare for the Elderly...most of the more socialist changes were their idea, and it's made quite a difference.

Put it this way, my Grandad turned 80, so the Council, as a matter of course, gave them a new, more efficient Boiler in the house. My Granny has trouble with her breathing. First measure, was to put in a Bannister on the stairs to help her. Big woop I know, but that was a stopgap. She now has a brand new, and free, Stairlift, and the Council are going to install a downstairs Lavvy, free of charge. Add in that the Council offer £x a month to hire a cleaner..... thats the sort of Government I want. One where you know your taxes are going on improving peoples lives.

Just a shame the Lib Dems are in a catch 22. Lots of people would vote for them, but see it as a wasted vote. Thus, a smaller number actually vote for them, turning that small number into 'wasted' votes. The circle is then formed, and it's hard to break out.

Also, please note that the more Right Wing papers will happily point out that, per head, Scotland has more Tax money spent on it than it contributes. Of course, this fails to take into account North Sea Gas and Oil, which is ours. But hey, as long as they can keep those nasty little socialist ideas out of Westminster, who gives a hoot about the truth? I mean, if England adopted many of Scotlands policies, what exactly would the Daily Nazi, sorry, Daily Mail, have to complain about? Daily Express has the monopoly on Diana after all.

The daily mail is the definition of a hate rag.
The Sun is pretty bad too though.
Didn't know that about the Lib Dems in scotland, thanks for the information.

I feel like moving to Scotland.

Politicians are crap pretty much everywhere. They're all so corrupt, for every man or woman that gets into politics and tries to do something good, there's 20 others in it to line their own pockets with money from oil companies, insurance companies, and more.

it sucks.. I've been able to vote for 18 years now, and I feel like every single vote has been wasted and always will be :(

Oh, and don't forget cheaper University Tuition in Scotland for Scots as well.

Oooer. This has turned into 'Doc bigs up his Country'

Right, back to the dour, doom mongering the thread is meant to be.

Pffft. Cheaper? In ireland, the tution is free!
And free healthcare. (If a bit underfunded/inefficient)

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:The theory of Government in Britain is based on Policies and Manifesto's. In the run up to the General Election, the various Political Parties publish their manifesto, a list of promises for the forthcoming Political Term as to what new laws they intend to introduce, taxation plans etc. This is then meant to be digested by the voters, so they can then go and vote for which Party they feel has the best deal for them as a individual.

Wow that sounds like a great system. I wish they did that over here. I can't remember the last time I heard a campaign promise that might have actually meant anything. People over here talk about crap like "family values" and other junk that has nothing to do about anything they could possibly do while in office. American politics ran into the gutter that your system appears to heading into long long ago (long before I could vote). It's the reds verses the blues with no real third option, so you're on one side or the other or you're just wasting your time. Sad really.

Very little has depressed me more than the media storm that's been brewing around the republican vice president candidate. I've heard infinitely more about her glasses and clothing style than what the presidential candidate plans to do during his term in office should they be elected. That's just sad.

I just wish Politicians spent more time explaining why THEY are the ones for the job, and less why their opponents aren't.

I don't care who is poking who, or who did what when they were at school. Why do they deserve my vote?

The answer to get honest politicians:

Pay cap/minimum of living wage +15% and make it punishable by incarceration (Rockefeller style) to accept contributions.
Death sentence to politicians how use the military/police for personal gain (after a fair and public trial by jury, by their constituency of course)
Allow campaign ads in news papers and public broadcasting only, with equal times SET for each platform.

Capitalism & free market has no place in the functional mechanics of a political system that is geared to support said capitalism/free market.

Liberty is paid for with the blood of tyrants, and no guardian can be trusted if their convictions are mercenary.

Just say'n

Pretty much agree with you there Belphegor, though Death Sentence might be a bit much....

Certainly, an MP or Domestic Equivalent is elected to represent his or her contituents, NOT whichever big business offers them a place on the board.

I'm pro-death sentence for "white-collar" political crimes and force-of-arms abuses, since they do such great harm over the lives of so many people.
and it would be nice to see some people that fight for the death sentence as a "deterrent" take a couple of bullets...
(oh I would LOVE to see oh commander and chief brought to trial for war crimes)
.. but I digress, as these may be topics for other posts.

Indeed! I prefer the idea of Coporal Punishment anyways.

Chop the swines hands off, that he might live with the shame of dipping the pudgy little fingers into too many pies.

To become a politician of any power, you have to sell out to so many different factions. Even if you entered with pristine ideals, by the time you get to the level you have power, so many people have their hooks in you, you are theirs. In America campaign promises are a joke. You can bet that almost all promises are going to be broken. As for chopping or any kind of punishment, it won't work. At least not now. You know the lawyers would get that law and twist it till it ended up, if you get caught talking crap about your leaders, then you get chopped.

That's where the pay cut (down to living wage +15%) comes in.
If the president/congress/senate where making that WITH NO HOPE OF FINICAL ADVANCEMENT, I think there would be a whole host of greedy a**h**** that would move on to greening pastures.
I really think balancing the power between those in political power and those of the civilian populace is to directly control the politician's personal income.
i.e. If your in office, your not making much over what you need to pay for your necessities and a pittance.
And if that public servant breaches that public contract... we treat them like the Rockefeller Laws treat a crack addict (except the punishment would be more deserving)

I'd love to see that happen but it never will.
Our politicians recently gave themselves a pay rise despite a huge tax deficit. And our Taoiseach gets paid more than the president of the US.

What are you going to do? That's politics for you.

Here in America right now I'm feeling the same way. I know both the people running are bold faced liars but there isn't really anything I can do about it as an individual. One of them will be elected, a third party candidate will probably never get elected in this country. I don't want to say we're screwed but as a working class of people there are people that think themselves above us, but only because they get to decide if they get a pay raise and not their boss.

Typeline wrote: I don't want to say we're screwed but.......

We're screwed. But this has been coming for a while now. Not really news here in America. It seems more and more people have become less and less interested in history. We seem to be totally unwilling to learn from mistakes. All we do now is stand on a soapbox, scream as loudly as you can, and point your finger at everyone else. Very sad.

As depressed as the Irish political scene makes me, I'd find the American one much much more depressing.
Irish people wouldn't put up with that sort of mudslinging or probing into personal matters. I can't imagine a candidates family or religion coming into it over here. And attack ads would generate an overwhelmingly negative response towards the attacker.

What makes the american system worse is that it's such a diverse country that it's near impossible that everyone is going to agree about anything.

Da Boss wrote:As depressed as the Irish political scene makes me, I'd find the American one much much more depressing.
Irish people wouldn't put up with that sort of mudslinging or probing into personal matters. I can't imagine a candidates family or religion coming into it over here. And attack ads would generate an overwhelmingly negative response towards the attacker.

What makes the american system worse is that it's such a diverse country that it's near impossible that everyone is going to agree about anything.

Agreed (with the UK system vs US system)... at least in parliamentary democracy there is some power for third parties and the process means it is not just "us vs them" that is so prevalent in the US at this point in every 4 years.

Hey, at least 2/3 of us agree that the war is crap. Not that anyone seems to even be focusing on that horror anymore. The big news is that the Republican VP nominee is a hockey mom. She is down to earth and homey. Of course, she doesn't seem to know much about world events either.......but neither does the current president. Sorry.....getting off track. ........must........stay..........on..........crack....er....track......

Da Boss wrote:As depressed as the Irish political scene makes me, I'd find the American one much much more depressing.
Irish people wouldn't put up with that sort of mudslinging or probing into personal matters. I can't imagine a candidates family or religion coming into it over here. And attack ads would generate an overwhelmingly negative response towards the attacker.

What makes the american system worse is that it's such a diverse country that it's near impossible that everyone is going to agree about anything.

It's funny you mention the personal attack thing. The thing about all the mudslinger is that a lot of republicans want to make everyone's personal decisions over here so we really get into personal matters concerning them, because it's what they want to regulate (I'm talking Sarah Palin the rest of the republican party and abortion here).

That kind of sums up why I can't support a Republican/conservative politician. Generally, a liberal seeks to increase freedom and/or opportunity, while a conservative seeks to restrict and/or anathemize behaviors based on an artificial belief system or personal bias. It's the difference between hope and opportunity, and repression and artificial control.

lord_sutekh wrote:That kind of sums up why I can't support a Republican/conservative politician. Generally, a liberal seeks to increase freedom and/or opportunity, while a conservative seeks to restrict and/or anathemize behaviors based on an artificial belief system or personal bias. It's the difference between hope and opportunity, and repression and artificial control.

People who lean a little more to the right say the exact opposite. They both consider themselves the protectors of freedoms and see the other side as wanting to limit freedoms. Both have things that limit freedoms, don't kid yourself.

You also might not want to call religion an "artificial belief system" if you want to make your point. Makes you come off as smug and glib (which oddly is what your partially protesting), plus the leaders in the Democrats also all follow "artificial belief system"s.

I coulda sworn I remember a while back folks on the news were saying Obama had an anti-hatemonger thing going and would never do commercials talking about the bad things his rivals have done. Or did that only apply when he was trying to get nominated, and republicans don't matter?

Kinda a shame though, if a candidate really never used any smear tactics or negative ads at all, no one in our country would take him/her seriously.

Necros wrote:I coulda sworn I remember a while back folks on the news were saying Obama had an anti-hatemonger thing going and would never do commercials talking about the bad things his rivals have done. Or did that only apply when he was trying to get nominated, and republicans don't matter?

Kinda a shame though, if a candidate really never used any smear tactics or negative ads at all, no one in our country would take him/her seriously.

Being nice doesn't win elections.

Ahtman wrote:People who lean a little more to the right say the exact opposite. They both consider themselves the protectors of freedoms and see the other side as wanting to limit freedoms. Both have things that limit freedoms, don't kid yourself.

You also might not want to call religion an "artificial belief system" if you want to make your point. Makes you come off as smug and glib (which oddly is what your partially protesting), plus the leaders in the Democrats also all follow "artificial belief system"s.

How do you protect freedom by limiting it? Is it one of those "we had to destroy the village to save the village" type things? Also, I'd like you to point out freedoms Democrats want to limit, outside of the freedom to abuse anyone you don't agree with or exploit the financial system?

And it's your own assumption that I'm talking about religion; I was thinking more along the lines of fictions like "trickle-down economics" and corporate ethics, concepts that have no basis in fact but are still treated as real. I'll thank you not to project your own beliefs (and possible doubts about those beliefs) onto me.

lord_sutekh wrote:How do you protect freedom by limiting it? Is it one of those "we had to destroy the village to save the village" type things? Also, I'd like you to point out freedoms Democrats want to limit, outside of the freedom to abuse anyone you don't agree with or exploit the financial system?

If at this point you can't understand both sides it's not really my job to teach you the basics of non-biased analysis. If your vision is that myopic I can't help you, especially on the internet. I do feel pity for you. You are missing out on a lot. Not even saying that you should be a Democrat (or Republican for that matter), just that it's sad to see someone that presents themselves as being absolutely sure of their position, but shows no true understanding of other positions and in fact seems to hate the other ones for acting so sure in theirs.

lord_sutekh wrote:And it's your own assumption that I'm talking about religion; I was thinking more along the lines of fictions like "trickle-down economics" and corporate ethics, concepts that have no basis in fact but are still treated as real. I'll thank you not to project your own beliefs (and possible doubts about those beliefs) onto me.

That is extremely common language used to describe religion, especially by people trying to bait/troll, and has been done so here on this board before, so you'll have to excuse my conclusion that you were referring to that. Like when someone refers to "the White Race" and then denies the racist connotation.

You also obliviously don't pay much attention or you'd see what is so funny about your projection of what you think I am all about.

As I once said in a Philsopohy class...

In a civilised world, certain freedom's must be surrendered for the good of the whole.

One example from the UK? No smoking in public venues unless outdoors. This means I can no longer enjoy a cigarette with my pint, unless I go outside. Theory behind this? There are more non-smokers than smokers, and passive smoking is harmful. Ergo, my freedom to smoke where I like is surrendered before the freedom of others to breathe clean air.

However, when it comes to Abortions and things, thats a different kettle of fish, because as far as I can see, it's generally a call made with Religious Bias, and I do not believe that State and Church should have anything at all to do with each other. There are of course other arguements against it, but most of them can be answered with greater Sex Education at an earlier age, so that children intent on having sex at a young age can at least make something resembling an informed choice. I got taught about the Bird's and the Bee's when I was 10. Now, 18 years later, and despite having had numerous sexual partners, I have no children, and have never had an STI or STD. Ergo, it works.