Jump to content
Chloe88

UK elections - who also doesn't give a hoot?

Recommended Posts

Acing It
8 minutes ago, Skycaptain said:

@Acing It, Boris Johnson, otherwise known as the nastiest parts of Donald Trump, but with an intellect, so he actually means to be like this 

I know, though I wouldn't put it that strongly, but he still didn't want to turn up for a debate last night and sent one of his stooges, who was quite rightly sent away, claiming channel 4 was in cahoots with labour. How lame and utterly manipulative.

Does anyone find it silly the way politicians roll up their shirt sleeves and tuck their tie in their shirt when they visit somewhere to look like they're hard at work and mucking in? It's all PR bumpf, and to think that some people fall for this...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chloe88
14 hours ago, Acing It said:

that some people fall for this...

People fall for all sorts, they clap, cheer and stamp their feet in approval when politicians make promises which are all massive lies.

 

The whole system needs people exactly like this for "democracy" to work. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld

I voted Lib Dem. I don't suppose they'll be elected, but then I'm voting in a safe labour seat anyway, so you could say what I vote doesn't matter pragmatically speaking. I might as well vote for the candidate or party with policies I most agree with, and in this election like the last one, that's the Lib Dems.

 

In response to an earlier point, I do hope they're not looking to start a nuclear war. Swinson doesn't exactly strike me as a warmonger. I don't know the actual quote, but I'm guessing what they actually said was that they would in principle use the nuclear deterrent if we were nuked first. Politicians often get asked this, and I think it would be irresponsible to answer in any other way: it wouldn't be much of a deterrent if we say we're not going to use it, even in retaliation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acing It
6 hours ago, michaeld said:

Politicians often get asked this, and I think it would be irresponsible to answer in any other way

I don't want to make this a political argy bargie but i seem to remember that's exactly wht Corben did, which makes him a scary candidate for me. The nuclear deterrant, however loathsome, disgusting and awful, is there for a reason, unfortunately. There are too many people out there who are part of the problem (I guess you all know who) and I really feel it's not been this dangerous a world for a long time. Even the cold war felt safer (he says subjectively hahah).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld
20 minutes ago, Acing It said:

I don't want to make this a political argy bargie but i seem to remember that's exactly wht Corben did, which makes him a scary candidate for me. The nuclear deterrant, however loathsome, disgusting and awful, is there for a reason, unfortunately. There are too many people out there who are part of the problem (I guess you all know who) and I really feel it's not been this dangerous a world for a long time. Even the cold war felt safer (he says subjectively hahah).

In fairness Corbyn is in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament so at least his position there is consistent. (Actually my recollection is he gave a non-commital answer to the question of whether he'd use nuclear weapons in retaliation, but that was a while ago.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blitzentan
23 hours ago, Whore*of*Mensa said:

Obviously this was awful for home buyers and my heart goes out to them, but did anyone freeze to death on the streets in winter because they had nowhere else to go?

Not JUST homebuyers - as though somehow they were a section apart and less deserving, it was bad for everyone - and don't forget the interest rates applied to all financial areas, made loans expensive, industry struggled. Did people die from the cold - of course they did, even if they HAD a home, because as per usual those who suffer most in times of austerity are those least able to withstand it, and there were no 'Winter fuel payments' for pensioners to keep warm. Few homes had central heating and anyway at times power supplies were on a rolling programme of blackouts.
 Things may be bad - but believe me, they have been much worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blitzentan
9 minutes ago, michaeld said:

In fairness Corbyn is in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament so at least his position there is consistent. (Actually my recollection is he gave a non-commital answer to the question of whether he'd use nuclear weapons in retaliation, but that was a while ago.)

If he disarmed unilaterally, then he wouldn't have any missiles to fire ;) . 

The 'Cold War' was   frightening at times - though we often joked about what we'd do if the 3 minute warning sounded. I vividly remember the Bay of Pigs affair, three nights when we went to bed not knowing if the bombs would start flying before we woke up next day. It was much later we learned that it was mainly due to the courage of a Russian submarine captain that the world did not end in a nuclear war - and survivors would experience a six-months 'nuclear' winter due to the dust thrown into the upper atmosphere.
I've red reports that the Trident missiles are a bit hit and miss. They're so expensive to fire that they're seldom tested and are as likely to hit a home country as the enemy
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/24/trident-misfire-spotlights-the-danger-of-fat-fingers-on-nuclear-buttons

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whore*of*Mensa
2 hours ago, Tanwen said:

Not JUST homebuyers - as though somehow they were a section apart and less deserving, it was bad for everyone - and don't forget the interest rates applied to all financial areas, made loans expensive, industry struggled. Did people die from the cold - of course they did, even if they HAD a home, because as per usual those who suffer most in times of austerity are those least able to withstand it, and there were no 'Winter fuel payments' for pensioners to keep warm. Few homes had central heating and anyway at times power supplies were on a rolling programme of blackouts.
 Things may be bad - but believe me, they have been much worse.

Well, homebuyers are certainly a dying breed in these times we live in. Only the older generation own homes, or those lucky people who had inheritances or help to get on the 'property ladder'.

 

I agree things were probably worse then, yes. However, the general trend of the last century was that quality of life improved with each generation.  Average life expectancy has decreased  over the last 10 years. Not a resounding success of Government 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld
39 minutes ago, Tanwen said:

The 'Cold War' was   frightening at times - though we often joked about what we'd do if the 3 minute warning sounded. I vividly remember the Bay of Pigs affair, three nights when we went to bed not knowing if the bombs would start flying before we woke up next day. It was much later we learned that it was mainly due to the courage of a Russian submarine captain that the world did not end in a nuclear war

Interesting - what we learnt in school is that Khrushchev backed down during the stand off at the Cuban Missle Crisis that followed the Bay of Pigs (much to the chagrin of Castro). It wouldn't surprise me if the full picture was more complex though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skycaptain

@michaeld, I have heard it said that the Russian missiles in Cuba weren't operational at that time, a major coup by US intelligence meant that Kennedy knew this, hence he could play hardball. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonemathsytoothbrushthief

I am entering this thread with the following position: I believe that not voting is just as legitimate a choice as voting for any particular party, BUT it is not an apolitical decision and has consequences for elections the same as any other action at this time. Hence I believe that people who choose not to vote should be just as informed as people who do vote, which preferably means learning about every last one of the people your decision may be either fucking over or benefitting. Some famous civil rights leaders are misunderstood as having fought for the right to vote, but they also can be found explaining that they also fought for the right to choose not to vote regardless. That's because unlike the common prejudiced view, anarchists are actually interested in politics and can be found in movements from the black panther party to the suffragettes, and being sceptical of what politicians promise is always a good starting point.

 

BUT it is a starting point only! Be sceptical of what politicians promise you by all means, but also be sceptical of those who are actually relying on non voters. Targeted ads used by all political parties in the UK, US and many other countries on social media are often focused on more apathetic voters as they can be more easily swayed, which is why I no longer consider not voting.

 

And WTF are those of you who think BROADBAND is the thing we're voting on doing on this planet!???? Climate change, disabled people in solitary confinement, reform of the gender recognition act to make it possible for the majority of trans people who do not "complete" transition in a way expected of them to have their gender recognised correctly in marriage, pushing back against the despicable actions of the home office against refugees on things like detention centres and the right to an appeal to any decision without being deported(seeing as theresa may changed the law so the uk now deports refugees to the middle of nowhere without any possessions or housing before expecting them to find a lawyer from THAT position to appeal)...having politicians in power who are less invested in going to war wherever they want to and more committed to increased social housing...bringing the many parts of the NHS which have been effectively privatised back in house and then ensuring that the funds it needs go to it and not private bodies...stopping brexit, let alone doing anything to make up for the repeated fucking over of irish people...stopping universal credit and all forms of benefits sanctions and pulling all private organisations out of the process for disabled people applying for benefits, going back to medical records as enough evidence...should I go on??? Or are you too middle class for empathy?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chloe88
12 hours ago, Lonemathsytoothbrushthief said:

And WTF are those of you who think BROADBAND is the thing we're voting on doing on this planet!????

 ha ha ha ha, you're so right.

That is exactly the sort of shitty lies a lot of people will be falling over for, and all the other pathetic lies being peddled. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld

Btw anyone want to chat about the results as they come in tomorrow evening (until we fall asleep that is, hehe). Last time our UK activism skype group turned into "let's watch the UK election". And if you want to stay on longer term for UK activism so much the better. ūüėõ (Though you can also remove yourself if not....) Any interest please make a post or PM me with your skype name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chrysocolla Dawn
On 11/23/2019 at 11:54 AM, OptimisticPessimist said:
On 11/22/2019 at 4:00 PM, Skycaptain said:

To me, the most important thing is people have died to ensure that others have the right to vote. Don't waste the privilege 

This. 

It's onea my pet peeves that this gets brought up so often. 
Chalk it up to abusive manipulative people in my life, but guilt tripping is a surefire way to make me do the exact opposite.
I don't know what you're specifically referring to about "people dying for my right to vote", as it could be so many things, but I asked them to do no such thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
On 11/29/2019 at 12:21 PM, Sleighcaptain said:

@Acing It, Boris Johnson, otherwise known as the nastiest parts of Donald Trump, but with an intellect, so he actually means to be like this 

A perfect description of Boris Johnson, from what I see across the pond.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
5 hours ago, Chrysocolla Dawn said:

but guilt tripping is a surefire way to make me do the exact opposite.
 

That seems like you're allowing yourself to be manipulated, except you're just doing the opposite of what they want you to do.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

Not voting; that'll show them! :P 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Midland Tyke
1 hour ago, daveb said:

Not voting; that'll show them! :P 

If the turn-out was really low, say under 50%, then yes, it might just make a point

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chrysocolla Dawn
2 hours ago, daveb said:

Not voting; that'll show them! :P 

Voting; that'll show them!¬†ūüėē

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
7 hours ago, Midland Tyke said:

If the turn-out was really low, say under 50%, then yes, it might just make a point

It wouldn't make any specific point.  It would simply show that a number of potential voters declined to take the opportunity to make their voices heard.   There could be any number of reasons for that.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chrysocolla Dawn
2 hours ago, Sally said:

It wouldn't make any specific point.  It would simply show that a number of potential voters declined to take the opportunity to make their voices heard.   There could be any number of reasons for that.  

I disagree with the idea that they're "declining the opportunity to make their voices heard."  Some abstain for exactly that purpose, to be heard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

I don't know if it's different in the UK, but in the US conservatives like it when fewer people vote because that tends to favor them. On the other hand, recent elections in the US show that sometimes it just takes a few people to swing an election one way or the other. Not voting doesn't really accomplish anything other than to let other people decide for you. I'm not sure what message people think it sends or who cares. I'm not trying to convince anyone else to vote (that's their choice), but I will always vote.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
7 hours ago, Chrysocolla Dawn said:

I disagree with the idea that they're "declining the opportunity to make their voices heard."  Some abstain for exactly that purpose, to be heard.

Uh...they can't be heard if they don't vote.  No vote means no voice.   Tell me exactly how Joe Smith's voice will be heard if he doesn't vote.   

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
Just now, Sally said:

Uh...they can't be heard if they don't vote.  No vote means no voice.   Tell me exactly how Joe Smith's voice will be heard if he doesn't vote -- because no one will know that he, Joe Smith, hasn't voted.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chrysocolla Dawn
7 hours ago, Sally said:

 

The people who run voting programs and analytics do take note of districts where voter turnout is lower.  They will know that your example person didn’t vote, along with others who share their mindset.

Midland Tyke’s example of very very low voter turnout would send a pretty strong message that people weren’t happy with the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blaiddmelyn
59 minutes ago, Chrysocolla Dawn said:

The people who run voting programs and analytics do take note of districts where voter turnout is lower.  They will know that your example person didn’t vote, along with others who share their mindset.

Midland Tyke’s example of very very low voter turnout would send a pretty strong message that people weren’t happy with the system.

...Or that they were apathetic or quite happy with the current govt. If you don't vote, it could be for a myriad of reasons. You may have your own reason but unless you're asked specifically, nobody else knows what it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chrysocolla Dawn
9 minutes ago, Blaiddmelyn said:

...Or that they were apathetic or quite happy with the current govt. If you don't vote, it could be for a myriad of reasons. You may have your own reason but unless you're asked specifically, nobody else knows what it is.

I can't disagree with that, it's definitely up to interpretation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chloe88

If people have died for the right to vote, well, I'm sorry to hear that. But does not mean I have to vote. People have died for many things - taking selfies, right to smoke, defending customs, defending practices.

So what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blaiddmelyn
2 hours ago, Chloe88 said:

If people have died for the right to vote, well, I'm sorry to hear that. But does not mean I have to vote. People have died for many things - taking selfies, right to smoke, defending customs, defending practices.

So what?

That's not a fair comparison. People have not died to give you the right to take a selfie. People have died taking selfies. That's like saying, "People died to end slavery" is the same as "People died testing 9V batteries on their tongue".

 

Not having the right to vote means not having any say, at all, in respect of your government and ultimately, the law and society. If you don't want to think for yourself and you're happy to be at the whim of an unaccountable government, then fair enough, be against the right to vote. But if you want to actually engage in the world you live in and feel better able to speak your mind then you'll want a society with a free right to vote.

 

My mum came from the Soviet Union and she was astonished at the Brexit vote. Said it was something that gave her faith in the UK. Because when she grew up, voting any way other than what the government wanted was a surefire way of getting punished. 

 

That's not to say you must vote. Do whatever you want, as long as you don't complain about the government or anything about the country afterwards, since you did nothing to try and change it. But don't mix up a freedom not to vote with the inability to vote. They're not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...