British Politicians

[TheResonator]

Every time I see a British politician -- particularly one of the key voices of a leading party -- voice their thoughts on television I am filled with a mixture of contempt, despair, and anger.

 

I believe that now, (perhaps) more than ever, politicians ought to represent the citizens of the country within which they were elected. In Britain, they don't. They're generally private school-boys who deal in the propagation of sound bites, the protection of the economy and - by extension - corporations.

 

Politics ought -- in my opinion -- to be a noble profession. It certainly was historically, to a greater degree at least. The people it attracts nowadays, at least in the UK, seem like they've been bred as punchable-faced regurgitative buzz-speakers. That these people represent the electorate is emblematic of a broken system.

 

What I'd like to find out from you lot is this: do you think the politicians running the country are doing a good job? Why/why not? And how do you think the system could realistically be improved?

[Anubis]

Has this post passed Cameron's nebulous 'family test'?

[Kevin D]

Every time I see a British politician -- particularly one of the key voices of a leading party -- voice their thoughts on television I am filled with a mixture of contempt, despair, and anger.

 

I believe that now, (perhaps) more than ever, politicians ought to represent the citizens of the country within which they were elected. In Britain, they don't. They're generally private school-boys who deal in the propagation of sound bites, the protection of the economy and - by extension - corporations.

 

Politics ought -- in my opinion -- to be a noble profession. It certainly was historically, to a greater degree at least. The people it attracts nowadays, at least in the UK, seem like they've been bred as punchable-faced regurgitative buzz-speakers. That these people represent the electorate is emblematic of a broken system.

 

What I'd like to find out from you lot is this: do you think the politicians running the country are doing a good job? Why/why not? And how do you think the system could realistically be improved?

 

Let's be absolutely clear here, politicians in this country are fair, but they've got to be sensible and realistic. It's time to send out a clear warning that these personal attacks will be met with robust action.

[TheResonator]

Has this post passed Cameron's nebulous 'family test'?

 

More like 'pleb'-ulous family test, am I right?

[Jairzinho]

As always I am focused on training and coaching my constituents.

[piscinin]

Every time I see a British politician -- particularly one of the key voices of a leading party -- voice their thoughts on television I am filled with a mixture of contempt, despair, and anger.

 

I believe that now, (perhaps) more than ever, politicians ought to represent the citizens of the country within which they were elected. In Britain, they don't. They're generally private school-boys who deal in the propagation of sound bites, the protection of the economy and - by extension - corporations.

 

Politics ought -- in my opinion -- to be a noble profession. It certainly was historically, to a greater degree at least. The people it attracts nowadays, at least in the UK, seem like they've been bred as punchable-faced regurgitative buzz-speakers. That these people represent the electorate is emblematic of a broken system.

 

What I'd like to find out from you lot is this: do you think the politicians running the country are doing a good job? Why/why not? And how do you think the system could realistically be improved?

 

Couldn't agree more. They're basically bought and paid for and the relationship with the media is far too cosy.

 

What needs to change? Wow, who knows.

 

The electorate needs to judge them on their deeds not their words. On their character not their personality.

 

The electorate needs to take responsibility for the actions of the politicians i.e. yes, you Mr Tax Payer you killed those Iraqis. This isn't X-Factor or a beauty contest. Your vote can kill people!

 

Complete transparency of all dealings between politicians, media and commercial entities.

 

Who knows what Murphy's law would throw up from changes like that though.

[TheResonator]

Let's be absolutely clear here, politicians in this country are fair, but they've got to be sensible and realistic. It's time to send out a clear warning that these personal attacks will be met with robust action.

 

This sort of sarcasm is completely unacceptable. Let that be said in words, in the event that it was not understood a priori: "completely unacceptable". Take a memo, Jeeves, and light my cigar. There are proles who tonight shall feel my fist.

[VladimirIlyich]

I can only name two politicians who I have any time for and they are Dennis Skinner and Tony Benn.

 

I believe these two men have remained true to their principles over a long period of time.

 

There may be others but they all fade into the muddle of self serving egotists and narcissists that politics seems to produce.

[Pony Princess]

I just seen a news article where DC was addressing youths while standing in front of some generic graffiti. Down wit da kidz. Embarrassing.

[TheResonator]

Couldn't agree more. They're basically bought and paid for and the relationship with the media is far too cosy.

 

What needs to change? Wow, who knows.

 

The electorate needs to judge them on their deeds not their words. On their character not their personality.

 

The electorate needs to take responsibility for the actions of the politicians i.e. yes, you Mr Tax Payer you killed those Iraqis. This isn't X-Factor or a beauty contest. Your vote can kill people!

 

Complete transparency of all dealings between politicians, media and commercial entities.

 

Who knows what Murphy's law would throw up from changes like that though.

 

Yeah, as a dilettante I agree. I think that the problem with respecting something like war is, again, with the media: it's like a dream nowadays more than a reality, and it's the same in the streets. People will kick or stab one another to death because that is the world they're confronted with through the media -- a world of simulation. The gravity of action has lost it's resonance.

 

The result is that nobody really has time for action any more, only for sensory perception: I believe this; I think that this is good; I say this; this is what I stand behind. Cameron tonight is talking about fixing a 'broken society'. Where's the context for that? What does that mean? What is it but another pantomime? There are varying degrees of breakage... a pistol can be broken for lack of a trigger, or it can be a pile of ash. Both pistols are broken, but mending either is an entirely different matter.

 

I'm 25 now; 15 years ago I was 10 and in 15 years I'll be 40. The older I get the more painful it becomes and I can't really understand how to journey through the stupidity of it all; something so profound as democracy essentially reduced to parody.

[piscinin]

Yeah, as a dilettante I agree. I think that the problem with respecting something like war is, again, with the media: it's like a dream nowadays more than a reality, and it's the same in the streets. People will kick or stab one another to death because that is the world they're confronted with through the media -- a world of simulation. The gravity of action has lost it's resonance.

 

The result is that nobody really has time for action any more, only for sensory perception: I believe this; I think that this is good; I say this; this is what I stand behind. Cameron tonight is talking about fixing a 'broken society'. Where's the context for that? What does that mean? What is it but another pantomime? There are varying degrees of breakage... a pistol can be broken for lack of a trigger, or it can be a pile of ash. Both pistols are broken, but mending either is an entirely different matter.

 

I'm 25 now; 15 years ago I was 10 and in 15 years I'll be 40. The older I get the more painful it becomes and I can't really understand how to journey through the stupidity of it all; something so profound as democracy essentially reduced to parody.

 

Ha! You are Jean Baudrillard and I claim by 5 pounds.

[Anubis]

I just seen a news article where DC was addressing youths while standing in front of some generic graffiti. Down wit da kidz. Embarrassing.

 

[Johnny Cougar]

Anybody remember an MP from the 80's called Dave Nellist? He was MP for a constituency in Coventry. He took the wages of a Factory worker out of his MP's salary and gave the rest back to Charities and social justice movements. That was less than 20 years ago, how things have changed for the better in just a couple of generations, I mean, who wants cunts like him who actually represented his constituents and took a 60% drop from what he was entitled to.

I'd much rather be represented by some bastion of the Community who charges Taxpayers 7k for somewhere to store his 100 quid a bottle Scotch.

I can't remember MP's from any of the political parties being as far removed from those people they claim to represent as these bastards nowadays.

Oh and by the way, Nellist was labelled a loony for actions like that, someone who was a troublemaker and anti-British.

[lifetime fan]

Is it just me or does he look more smug and punchable every single fucking day?

[Pony Princess]

 

Ha yes thats the one. What a fucking cleanshirt.

[VladimirIlyich]

[YOUTUBE]lwNQf08Kxsw[/YOUTUBE]

[Guest ian garro]

As long as politics is viewed as a career, by people going into it, then we're going to be stuck with the present system, unfortunately. The longer that goes on, the more the policies of the main political parties will converge, the less people will vote - or in the worst case scenario, they'll start voting for extremist parties.

 

In years past, people entered politics in the hope of, however naive/deluded it now seems, making a difference to peoples' lives. Those people had priciples and they had the courage of their convictions. Whether you agree with him, hate him or whatever, people like Tony Benn (and I'm sure his Tory equivalent) entered politics for exactly the reasons - why I'd like all politicians to be there; because he believed in something.

 

Nowadays, principles are seen as something that may hold you back, in regards to career progression - so it's best not to be outspoken on any issues, in case your next boss, or party leader holds different views, which would then block any career progression. This means that, almost to a man, they trot out the same, tired old lines, time and time again. This then leads to a lack of faith/trust in those in power and apathy as it "won't really make a difference who I vote for", type of attitude.

 

Place all that against the background of what happened in the last election, where myself, as a Socialist was considering voting LibDem, only to see them abandon their beliefs and cosy up to the Tories (this is the way I see it - not stating it as fact), and is it any wonder people are disenfranchised ?

 

The whole thing stinks to high heaven I'm afraid, and it will do until there's a credible alternative.

[Strontium]

Careerist MPs are inevitable when you have so many safe seats. Safe seats are inevitable when you have a FPTP voting system rather than proportional representation. So my advice would be to vote for a party that would implement PR if you want an end to political careerism.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Careerist MPs are inevitable when you have so many safe seats. Safe seats are inevitable when you have a FPTP voting system rather than proportional representation. So my advice would be to vote for a party that would implement PR if you want an end to political careerism.

 

What is that party are a bit spineless and you can't trust them to come through on their pledges: Should we still vote for them?

[Guest ian garro]

Careerist MPs are inevitable when you have so many safe seats. Safe seats are inevitable when you have a FPTP voting system rather than proportional representation. So my advice would be to vote for a party that would implement PR if you want an end to political careerism.

 

Yes, I agree with the PR/FPTP argument. The fact is though, the LibDems have screwed the pooch on that now, haven't they ? They got some weak promise from the Tories on referendum, the referendum was all-to-predictabley defeated, and it'll now be decades before we have that chance again, especially considering how weak a position the LibDems now find themselves in.

[Strontium]

What is that party are a bit spineless and you can't trust them to come through on their pledges: Should we still vote for them?

 

 

I think I would congratulate them for delivering on 75% of their pledges despite forming less than 20% of the government, and then I would help them try to deliver the remaining 25% next time.

 

Anyway, there's more than one party that supports proportional representation.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I think I would congratulate them for delivering on 75% of their pledges despite forming less than 20% of the government, and then I would help them try to deliver the remaining 25% next time.

 

75% seventyfivemershment.

 

Anyway, there's more than one party that supports proportional representation.

 

That's true, there is. I'd probably suit the Green party, if I weren't, you know, serious about politics. I'm tempted to start a new political party. Call it 'The Radicals'. In 100 years, they can have a slimy leader wanting to re-brand the party and call themselves 'The New Radicals'. Forward thinking, Stronts, that's the key.

[Guest TK-421]

I think I would congratulate them for delivering on 75%...

 

Yep, they deserve congratulating. That's what I'll be doing - sending my congratulations. They definitely delivered on 75% of that stuff they said they'd do. It could hardly have gone any better, could it? Played a blinder there. Now for that elusive 25%...

[VladimirIlyich]

Just for clarification,what have the libdems delivered on that they promised they would?

It wasnt student fees as theyve increased nearly 3 times and it wasnt PR because the referendum was for a system that was nothing like the PR system the libdems have been fighting for for a long time.

 

So please tell me what have they delivered on?

[IronSpy]

I think I would congratulate them for delivering on 75% of their pledges despite forming less than 20% of the government, and then I would help them try to deliver the remaining 25% next time.

 

 

Which 75% is the key question, and one I don't see Lib Dems promoting as strongly as the number. Seeing as most manifestos are filled with nothing statements and hot air, laced with a few specific policy proposals, the number on its own is far from impressive.

 

What is important is how much the 25% that was discarded mattered and had strong priority to Lib Dem voters in comparison to the 75%? How much of that 75% was also in both Tory and Labour manifestos? And how much have the Tories been able to implement that wasn't in either manifesto, and therefore not covered by the narrow terms of the UCL study? Much of the latter has tended to be amongst things very repulsive to Lib Dem voters.

 

Alongside which of their policies they managed to keep in, Lib Dem MPs have to also take responsibility for the harsher Conservative policies that could not have got through without their votes. Does the sum of what they helped to achieve balance positively overall? (No one is accepting the argument that they would have been far worse without the LD, they would have been a minority government and forced to compromise.)