No post body was provided.
The strange case of Britain’s demise
431–440 of 584 posts
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#432I feel like the article lays it out pretty well? It’s a government who’s been in power too long, whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt and the impossibility of delivering the Brexit fairy-tale, and who weren’t simply ejected at the last election because of Corbyn’s overwhelming unpopularity.
> whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt
How many MPs were removed in this witch hunt? And why is it a witch hunt if the electorate is told "this is the most important question for at least a generation", they vote on it, and the representatives in parliament do their damnedest to prevent carrying out the thing voted for, and thus the electorate decide to remove some of them?
That sounds like democracy in action to me (and anti-democracy by those who tried to stymie Brexit).
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
Democracy is remarkably robust and people fighting is not an indication that it is faltering. The UK has a long and proud history of tenuous balance between different groups that are all on the verge of doing violence to one another, the current era is remarkably peaceful and cooperative. People are undercalling the effects of a multi-decade campaign against energy security in favour of environmentalist goals. The dr…
Absolutely none of that is true. The UK has the highest energy prices of any country in Europe and - not coincidentally - its energy companies make the highest profits. The UK could have promoted renewables, and did for a while. But the current government - like you - is actively hostile to decentralised solutions that work, and prefers to promote corporate choke points over energy supply that have put the entire pop…
The "neoliberal dogma" has made America the most prosperous country in the world. Your thesis doesn't compute.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually no, they did not run on that. They ran on a platform of “sharing the proceeds of growth”, and then changed their mind after getting into office. I believe the outgoing minister left a (lighthearted?) note saying “I’m afraid there is no money left”, which was used as a partial justification.
08 financial crises the uk went full austerity and basically missed out on the economic boom.
US went on austerity too but it didn't stop them their economic boom.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#435I feel like the article lays it out pretty well? It’s a government who’s been in power too long, whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt and the impossibility of delivering the Brexit fairy-tale, and who weren’t simply ejected at the last election because of Corbyn’s overwhelming unpopularity.
Democracies elsewhere can learn a thing or two from recent election rounds in the US, the UK, and elsewhere. Basically, we've seen a surge in populism and irrational sentiment dominating politics and being translated into actual policy with disastrous results. The lesson there is that you can win an election and then loose an empire. I don't think it's a British problem either. We've had populists dominating politics…
Like you, all of my political opponents are stupid or evil, often both! It's so convenient…
Is there no one you disagree with politically who is just popular instead of populist, knowledgeable and yet disagrees with you? If you can't think of any then I'd suggest the problem lies within you.
By the way
> as it is won't be great
Great is a geographical term. Just as British people remain european after leaving the EU, they (those on the island of Great Britain) would remain part of Great Britain.
But do continue to regale us all from up high with your superior knowledge about economies and such, knowing things like why Great Britain is named as it is, that's just a trifling fact for plebs.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely none of that is true. The UK has the highest energy prices of any country in Europe and - not coincidentally - its energy companies make the highest profits. The UK could have promoted renewables, and did for a while. But the current government - like you - is actively hostile to decentralised solutions that work, and prefers to promote corporate choke points over energy supply that have put the entire pop…
The "neoliberal dogma" has made America the most prosperous country in the world. Your thesis doesn't compute.
Specifically it has made a small group of US citizens extremely rich.
As a country, looking at all citizens, the US isn't exactly a stellar example of wealth distribution, median outcomes, education, or health delivery.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes voters should just buckle down and vote for a big left/right party. Voters are getting too much democracy for their own good!
Agree. Look at democracies where two parties dominate. The choices look awful. Where is the center represented in UK and US?
The Democrats and Republicans already represent a range of the political spectrum, they aren’t monolithic.
And the US isn’t a Parliamentary democracy, so Congresspeople don’t have to vote along party lines (and often don’t).
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
The “center” or “left” of what? The US is a country that’s as religious as Iran where a decisive majority disapprove of the Supreme Court’s ban on school prayer: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/13/south-carol... . It’s a country where 68% of Americans wouldn’t pay even $10 per month in energy bills to mitigate climate change: https://www.cato.org/blog/68-americans-wouldnt-pay-10-month-... You might not…
Yes, but since the US is a more right-wing country than the rest of the developed world (healthcare, death penalty, taxes...), that would mean the Democrats are "centrist" and Republicans "right." Characterizing based on relativity to the developed world seems much more fitting, since we're discussing it between people mostly from other developed countries and in a thread about Britain.
Right wing on what measure?
With abortion restrictions in Europe, Europe looks further right than the US or Canada on that issue.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with what you describe is that it doesn't merely prevent large areas from dominating the smaller; it actually allows the smaller areas to gang up and impose policies on the majority. Tyranny of the majority sucks, but tyranny of the minority is even worse.
In the case of my small example: I am the rural vote so I don't see our collective force as tyranny of course. As long as basic rights are respected. Ours is a case of a region with specific identity and interests not shared by the single metropole so a purely proportional result is not ideal from our perspective. But I understand your point.
If the goal is to prevent the metropolitan area from unilaterally imposing itself on the rest of the province, all you really need for that is some kind of veto power. For example, a bicameral legislature in which one chamber is elected through some proportional system and actually writes laws, and the other one that represents all the various interest groups (under whatever representation formulas people find agreeable) and approves them.
Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
"democracy is under threat when people I don't like are democratically elected." Is it invisible to you how such statements are, themselves, bad for democracy?
"democracy is under threat when people ~I don't like~ who advocate the overturn of democracy are elected" FTFY.
You include Hilary Clinton in that? When she called Trump an “illegitimate president”?