Time for Change? (UK General Election)

[Sphinx]

The announcement for the start of the next UK General Election is almost upon us, the Conservatives have gained the centre ground, the latest opinion polls hint at a possible hung parliament, and if the tabloids are to be believed (no reason not to) then Labour appear to have little left to offer.

But wait, if the above is to believed, then how can this be?

An opposition party gaining the centre ground so close to an election whilst the current government is considered to be in tatters should be running away with it. So what's going on?

As a life long Labour supporter I have to admit it's been pretty tough lately and I have convinced myself that it's time for a change, although I wouldn't go as far as giving my vote to the Conservatives, hell would have to freeze over first. Perhaps this is the reason why the conservatives aren't running away with it as they should be because due to many people like myself accepting that change is needed but still refusing to cast their vote to the conservatives and are therefore switching to the Lib Dems or some other tin pot party?

Maybe it's due to something entirely different?

 

[Famine]

The current problem, as I can make out, is where the parties are on the political compass.

In essence, there's four quadrants, divided by Authoritarian/Libertarian (those who desire more governmental responsibility against those who prefer less) and economic left/right (essentially socialism against capitalism).

At present, all three leading political parties are in the same quadrant - Authoritarian/right (that is capitalism that they control). This doesn't really represent a problem if you're a traditional Tory, because that's where they've always been, but it's something of a problem if you're a traditional Labour voter, because they'd always been Libertarian/left (socialism and personal responsibility) until the advent of New Labour, and the Lib Dems have always been Libertarian/right (capitalism and personal responsibility).

So, currently, if you want to vote for one of the three main parties, your choice is a very controlling right-wing (Labour), a controlling very right-wing (Conservative) or a slightly contolling right-wing (Liberal).

What the hell kind of choice is that? I mean, I might not agree with the traditional Labour voter's political mindset, but it's not difficult to see why they'd be so disenfranchised - and unwilling to vote Conservative because they're pretty much the same, or Lib Dem because they're Labour Lite.

So who do you go for? A fringe party? Well, aside from the fact none of them will get in, the Greens couldn't organise an economy if their life depended on it, the BNP have some genuine policies on the face of it but, underneath, are a shower of racist ex-Labour supporters hoping you fall for their plans for the economy and criminal justice system and UKIP are exactly the same as the BNP but a shower of racist ex-Tory supporters.


That said, as a distinctly unrepresented voter, I know exactly who I'm voting for. I'm exercising my right to vote and scrawling "None of the Above" on my ballot paper.

The spectrum of political opinion in the UK is not being represented, with all parties trying to capitalise on the same notion - that people want their own money and everyone else's, while being allowed to do what they want but banning everything they don't agree with - which has been a Tory ideal since 1643.

Not voting is not the way to get the message across. 30-35% turnout is normal, and a 35% share of that (or 12% of the electorate) is enough to rule the country! The only way to do it is to turnout en masse and vote for none of the buggers. Imagine the mileage Paxman and the papers would get out of the largest share of votes being spoiled ballot papers - not people who couldn't be bothered to vote, but people who decided they were going to vote and voted against the entire system.

 

[TheCracker]

Totally agree with the above. I want change, but i'm not going to get that from the only 2 other realistic choices, which are the pretty much same product in a different coloured wrapper. Not only do they offer nothing different, but their election campaigns consist of seemingly nothing more than telling tales on and dissing the other parties. They all act like a bunch of fracking children.

Parties like the Greens, UKIP and the BNP will undoubtedly gain many more votes than previously. But can you seriously vote for a party whose main selling points are hating cars, or worse, not really liking people with different coloured skin?

Not voting isn't a protest against UK politics in 2010, it's apathy or just plain lazyness. A spoilt ballot paper is the only real way of showing your dissatisfaction. Either that or start a revolution.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I'm going to do something even worse than spoiling my vote at a general election.




I'm going to vote Plaid.

 

[Dotini]

The compass depicted above is a useful tool in understanding yourself and politics. Thanks to Famine for unearthing it. Looks like the older platforms closer to the "south pole" might show the way to go - back to the future.

All the best (you'll need it),
Dotini

 

[DK]

Tories being "a force for change"? Let me remind you, the Tories were the people who opposed Irish independence. So naturally I'm opposed to them. The word "conservative" in politics means "resistant to change".

The Lib Dems do appeal to libertarians. So does this mean that if they come to power, London will be flooded by "coffee" shops? Seeing as they share a political position (AFAIK) with the Dutch government.

Personally I never knew there was a darker side to Labour. I never knew they spawned the British Nazi National Party.

I naturally oppose the BNP and UKIP seeing as they both (according to Famine) have racist ideologies. I bet a part of Nick Griffin died when apartheid ended in South Africa. I'm pretty sure he might've taken part in pro-apartheid marches. He probably wants to make it illegal to be black, Irish or Asian. Pretty much "Brits only" really.

The Greens? I don't want to see G-Wizzes littering the streets of Britain the next time I go there. Electric cars suck and according to Famine, they're crap at organising an economy.

EDIT: Who is Plaid, ExigeEvan?

 

[Mark T]

I don't trust any of the parties to do what they propose in there respective broadcasts. So, like Famine I shall be drawing another small box on the voting slip and writing "other" next to it.

I shall just sit back and wait for the day when I can finally afford and have the means to emigrate (within next 5 years). I doubt much will have changed within that time (no matter who's in charge).

 

[ExigeEvan]

Personally I never knew there was a darker side to Labour. I never knew they spawned the British Nazi National Party.

Just to explain, Labour didn't "spawn" the BNP per se. It's just that the BNP have more Labour-orientated views to go with their race-driven policies, compared to UKIP which has a more conservative twist (though I believe UKIP are pro-independance from the EU, rather than racist).

EDIT: Who is Plaid, ExigeEvan?

Plaid Cymru is the Welsh National Party. Not to be confused with any association to the British National Party. Their foundation policy is Welsh independance, though this has mostly been sought by transferring more law-making powers to the Welsh Assembly and away from London rather than a genuine break-away.

I've voted for them in local elections but they make little difference on the national level.

 

[daan]

You've gone to plaid!
[/barf]

 

[MatskiMonk]

Not that I've been paying too much attention so far, but the only ones that seemed to be realistic in the post budget responses are the Lib Dems.

I do wonder though... Election style politics is probably the last thing the country needs at the moment - Empty promises made to key demographics.

At election time I always feel left out: Single white male aged 25-35, employed with medium income, no-dependants, no savings and no borrowings. When is somebody going to come along and make policies for people like me! <tongue in cheek?>

 

[Joel]

I feel the same way about Canada. I can't vote for any of the parties. The Conservatives are ass backwards religious bigots who want to overturn gay marriage, the Liberals want to impose a carbon tax, and take away our guns, and the NDP want to nationalize electricity.

I "hate" the Liberal platform the least, but I need something to combine the NDP's equal rights advocacy (but no affirmative action), and economically to follow the Conservative model. In short, I need a Libertarian party, but they only get 0.05% of the vote. I think when I'm able to vote, I'll void my ballot, or vote for the Marijuana party as a protest.

 

[Sphinx]

The current problem, as I can make out, is where the parties are on the political compass.

In essence, there's four quadrants, divided by Authoritarian/Libertarian (those who desire more governmental responsibility against those who prefer less) and economic left/right (essentially socialism against capitalism).

At present, all three leading political parties are in the same quadrant - Authoritarian/right (that is capitalism that they control). This doesn't really represent a problem if you're a traditional Tory, because that's where they've always been, but it's something of a problem if you're a traditional Labour voter, because they'd always been Libertarian/left (socialism and personal responsibility) until the advent of New Labour, and the Lib Dems have always been Libertarian/right (capitalism and personal responsibility).

So, currently, if you want to vote for one of the three main parties, your choice is a very controlling right-wing (Labour), a controlling very right-wing (Conservative) or a slightly contolling right-wing (Liberal).

What the hell kind of choice is that? I mean, I might not agree with the traditional Labour voter's political mindset, but it's not difficult to see why they'd be so disenfranchised - and unwilling to vote Conservative because they're pretty much the same, or Lib Dem because they're Labour Lite.

So who do you go for? A fringe party? Well, aside from the fact none of them will get in, the Greens couldn't organise an economy if their life depended on it, the BNP have some genuine policies on the face of it but, underneath, are a shower of racist ex-Labour supporters hoping you fall for their plans for the economy and criminal justice system and UKIP are exactly the same as the BNP but a shower of racist ex-Tory supporters.


That said, as a distinctly unrepresented voter, I know exactly who I'm voting for. I'm exercising my right to vote and scrawling "None of the Above" on my ballot paper.

The spectrum of political opinion in the UK is not being represented, with all parties trying to capitalise on the same notion - that people want their own money and everyone else's, while being allowed to do what they want but banning everything they don't agree with - which has been a Tory ideal since 1643.

Not voting is not the way to get the message across. 30-35% turnout is normal, and a 35% share of that (or 12% of the electorate) is enough to rule the country! The only way to do it is to turnout en masse and vote for none of the buggers. Imagine the mileage Paxman and the papers would get out of the largest share of votes being spoiled ballot papers - not people who couldn't be bothered to vote, but people who decided they were going to vote and voted against the entire system.

That pretty much sums it up but I'm not entirely convinced about New Labour's placement on the chart, although it's true that a shift to the right was the whole point of New Labour but I don't believe it is that extreme.

Although I have always been a labour supporter I can't actually remember the last time I've voted for them. The problem I have is living in a usually Tory stronghold with a very slight possibility of a Lib Dem shock win when the Tories are at their lowest in popularity. I therefore tactical vote for the Lib Dems in the hope of tilting the balance in labour's favour.

In reference to Labour's leap to the right that was to counter the disastrous effects of the 1970's Winter of Discontent and thus the rise of Thatcherism, at the time I was prepared to go along with and in a sense still do, and although your chart shows (if correct) labour having pulled further to the right more than anyone would've imagined there still remains an underlying ideology that still holds many of the core values of old Labour. I don't believe the chart shows this and there is also the more tangible things such as the minimum wage and family tax credits that wouldn't normally be so forthcoming from any party in that position on the chart.

On a lighter note, seeing you mentioned Paxman. Let's hope we get more of the same as this:

 

[ExigeEvan]

And so it's finally been called. The election is for the 6th of May. I may, or may not be in any fit state to vote, but I shall do regardless of the 7s tournament, my Birthday and a "field trip" that are all in the week running upto it.

 

[Famine]

I believe there is now a Facebook group calling for people to go out and vote for no-one...

 

[DK]

I suppose that if the BNP stand for election in Northern Ireland they will probably plan to bring back segregation.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I believe there is now a Facebook group calling for people to go out and vote for no-one...

Yeah I've heard in several places there's a push for a "none of the above" option. Going to be alot of spoiled votes this year.

 

[MatskiMonk]

So the local billboards are now full of Tory party propaganda, It truly disgusts me that politics, when at it's most important (election time), resorts to Jerry Springer-esque slanging matches...

I've been urging everyone at work to get out and vote, I'm sick of people slagging off the system, and not doing anything about.

Like Maxi Jazz says, inaction is a weapon of mass destruction...

What the country needs is a leader... not a politician!!!

 

[Dotini]

I'm exercising my right to vote and scrawling "None of the Above" on my ballot paper.

I think Famine should vote for our fellow libertarian, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

My prediction: A walk in the park for Cameron, even without his baby.

 

[Robin]

Any chance of a poll for this thread like the American election one had?

The problem is, as Famine touch on, all the major parties are basically the same (right wing) you just have to choose how far right you want to go!

 

[Famine]

I think Famine should vote for our fellow libertarian, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

There are, sadly, four problems with that.

1. Boris should never be in charge of anything, ever. Funny though it'd be.
2. Boris is a member of the Conservative Party.
3. Boris does not represent my constituency, so I cannot vote for him.
4. We do not actually vote for who our Prime Minister is.

 

[Neal]

Whilst I appreciate that all the main parties are fairly right wing and there isn’t a huge amount separating them we have to keep in perspective that whoever wins this election will be running this country for the next 5 years and it will make a difference who gets in. If enough people did go to the polls with the ideological stance of voting for non of the above then it probably would send out a clear message to the political parties that there is a large percentage of the population who are dissatisfied with the current choices. What should be remembered though is a vote for non of the above will be a spoiled vote and will therefore be disregarded having the same result as not bothering to vote at all. It may create a bit of a story but this will likely be a flash in the pan and will soon be forgotten in the winners news storm after the election. It has always been quickly forgotten when there has been a particularly low turn out in the past so I don’t see a non of the above protest being much different.

Your vote does matter so it should be used and not wasted. As Sphinx has pointed out your vote doesn’t have to be for your chosen party but can be used to try and prevent another party from winning a seat. It is important that you know who is likely to win in your ward and if it is the party who you least want to run the country then vote for the 2nd party with the hope of swinging the balance in their favour and therefore helping you preferred party.

I grew up under a Tory government and I don’t want the same for my son. I also don’t want a hung parliament, as this will make any new policies incredibly difficult to get through. The Tory’s are so out of touch with modern working class society it is scary, they were recently banding about a statistic to criticise the current Labour government that 54% of girls under the age of 18 from poor families are getting pregnant, the actual statistic is 5.4% not 54%! That fact that they thought this was a reasonable percentage is just one example of their ludicrous view of the lower classes but more worryingly it is an indication of where their priorities lie. Labour is far from faultless but they do a lot for the people who need it most such as family tax credit and minimum wages as Sphinx highlighted.

Your vote in this election is as much about who doesn’t win as who does. If you think it is time for a change do you really want The Conservatives in government? The Lib Dems are not going to win so a vote for them, unless tactical, is just sitting on the fence and doesn’t really achieve anything. If you don’t vote you don’t have a voice and this is the most important election in 13 years so think carefully and make it count.

 

[Famine]

The Tory&#8217;s are so out of touch with modern working class society it is scary, they were recently banding about a statistic to criticise the current Labour government that 54% of girls under the age of 18 from poor families are getting pregnant, the actual statistic is 5.4% not 54%!

Good job we didn't go to war on a completely fabricated - rather than misread - statistic using those same two numbers fed to us by the (Labour) government of the time...


Ideologically, the current Tory party are much closer to the Labour party when the two of us were kids than the current Labour party are - though they're both pretty much opposite. If you're a 70s/80s Labour voter, a vote for any of the main three parties is a vote for the opposite of what you stand for. Have a crack at the political compass test and see where you fall...

Whilst I appreciate that all the main parties are fairly right wing and there isn&#8217;t a huge amount separating them we have to keep in perspective that whoever wins this election will be running this country for the next 5 years and it will make a difference who gets in. If enough people did go to the polls with the ideological stance of voting for non of the above then it probably would send out a clear message to the political parties that there is a large percentage of the population who are dissatisfied with the current choices. What should be remembered though is a vote for non of the above will be a spoiled vote and will therefore be disregarded having the same result as not bothering to vote at all.

Actually, that's not true. Non-votes are disregarded. Spoiled votes are included. The returning officer for each constituency will not read out the number of people who didn't vote - but they will read out the number of people who voted and spoiled.

This generates a highly important political message.

The problem we currently have is that all the parties are in the same quadrant - authoritarian/right - albeit to varying degrees. This means that they are catering only to 25% of all possible ideologies. Why is that? Well, it's because all parties are led by career politicians - people who set out to be politicians, studying politics and/or law at university - guided by publicists (spin doctors). They say what they believe is popular and what will give them power, tempered by those varying degrees by what they actually believe.

Authoritarian/right is a very popular point of view. People believe they should have freedom (financial right) but there need to be regulations to stop other people spoiling it (authoritarian). It's fundamentally contradictory, but there you go. In order to get power, the politicians and publicists quite rightly believe they need to cater to that sector.

A vote for any of them validates this notion and, if polling is to be believed, 90% of all votes will go to one of the three main parties. That's a pretty strong validation - and there's only one way to counteract this.

Only 35% of people actually bother to vote, on average, so you're looking at 30% of all potential votes saying "Authoritarian/right is fine by me" and 70% saying "Meh, whatever". What's needed is a countervote to say "Authoritarian/right is not fine by me" - so you'd need another 30% of all potential voters to agree to vote for a chosen non-mainstream party (which won't happen) or to vote for no party at all.

The message this sends out to the politicians and publicists is that what they think is popular or just plain acceptable is, in fact, as likely to loose votes as it is to keep them. This generates political difference - the parties can no longer all occupy the same ground and expect to gain votes with irritating, picky points-scoring off each other. Gradually they move to occupy different ground - though the Tory party has always traditionally been authoritarian/right and is unlikely to move much.


The upshot is that this will change nothing for the next parliament. It may well change nothing for the one after that - or even the one after that - but gradually we all become represented again. We're not going to see anything but authoritarian/right being elected into government this time round. We won't see any benefits - we're now screwed into style-over-substance, populist hypocrites like Brown, Cameron and Clegg - but our kids will.

Every vote for the main three parties is a vote to retain the status quo in a variety of colours. Every non-vote is a vote of indifference. Every spoiled vote is a vote against the status quo and it is the only way to enact any form of change in the political system of our country. Though it's a very, very long game.

 

[Neal]

Good job we didn't go to war on a completely fabricated - rather than misread - statistic using those same two numbers fed to us by the (Labour) government of the time...

Touché...Maaatt Daymuhn made a film about that! Labour have made mistakes but I don't honestly think the decision would have been any different if it was a Tory government making it.

Ideologically, the current Tory party are much closer to the Labour party when the two of us were kids than the current Labour party are - though they're both pretty much opposite. If you're a 70s/80s Labour voter, a vote for any of the main three parties is a vote for the opposite of what you stand for. Have a crack at the political compass test and see where you fall...

True, the current Tory party is closer to the Labour party of the 70s/80s but they are still further right than the current Labour government. A lot of your first post in this thread makes for pretty depressing reading and even if the exact points on the chart are debatable it’s not far from the truth. If I was going to bang my nail to the post I guess my quadrant is Authoritarian/Left but mid way Authoritarian and just left. I am also not represented by the main parties! I do think it’s important to stand up for what you believe in but I also think it is important to be realistic about your vote and how it should be used. I could never vote Conservative even if they are quite close to Labour on the compass and I want to make sure that my vote is used to prevent them getting into power. Unfortunately we don’t have Brewster's Millions to campaign for non of the above so even with a successful facebook group it is unlikely that a protest of this kind will have a significant effect even if I do uphold its principals.

EDIT: to include the below

Actually, that's not true. Non-votes are disregarded. Spoiled votes are included. The returning officer for each constituency will not read out the number of people who didn't vote - but they will read out the number of people who voted and spoiled.

This generates a highly important political message.

The problem we currently have is that all the parties are in the same quadrant - authoritarian/right - albeit to varying degrees. This means that they are catering only to 25% of all possible ideologies. Why is that? Well, it's because all parties are led by career politicians - people who set out to be politicians, studying politics and/or law at university - guided by publicists (spin doctors). They say what they believe is popular and what will give them power, tempered by those varying degrees by what they actually believe.

Authoritarian/right is a very popular point of view. People believe they should have freedom (financial right) but there need to be regulations to stop other people spoiling it (authoritarian). It's fundamentally contradictory, but there you go. In order to get power, the politicians and publicists quite rightly believe they need to cater to that sector.

A vote for any of them validates this notion and, if polling is to be believed, 90% of all votes will go to one of the three main parties. That's a pretty strong validation - and there's only one way to counteract this.

Only 35% of people actually bother to vote, on average, so you're looking at 30% of all potential votes saying "Authoritarian/right is fine by me" and 70% saying "Meh, whatever". What's needed is a countervote to say "Authoritarian/right is not fine by me" - so you'd need another 30% of all potential voters to agree to vote for a chosen non-mainstream party (which won't happen) or to vote for no party at all.

The message this sends out to the politicians and publicists is that what they think is popular or just plain acceptable is, in fact, as likely to loose votes as it is to keep them. This generates political difference - the parties can no longer all occupy the same ground and expect to gain votes with irritating, picky points-scoring off each other. Gradually they move to occupy different ground - though the Tory party has always traditionally been authoritarian/right and is unlikely to move much.


The upshot is that this will change nothing for the next parliament. It may well change nothing for the one after that - or even the one after that - but gradually we all become represented again. We're not going to see anything but authoritarian/right being elected into government this time round. We won't see any benefits - we're now screwed into style-over-substance, populist hypocrites like Brown, Cameron and Clegg - but our kids will.

Every vote for the main three parties is a vote to retain the status quo in a variety of colours. Every non-vote is a vote of indifference. Every spoiled vote is a vote against the status quo and it is the only way to enact any form of change in the political system of our country. Though it's a very, very long game.

I didn’t realise spoiled votes were noted which does increase their relevance but as you say they still won’t change the outcome of this election.

The low turnout at the polls and the trend towards Authoritarian/right is disappointing and needs to change so a non of the above message does seem like a possible solution but it is the very long game and it is far from guaranteed as apathy can prevent it from building momentum. I admire anyone who takes a stance for what they believe in but this time round mine will be against Tory rather than against Brown, Cameron and Clegg. Maybe I should worry less about the consequences of a Tory government as they are all quite close but for now I believe they need to be kept out.

 

[Famine]

Touché...Maaatt Daymuhn made a film about that! Labour have made mistakes but I don't honestly think the decision would have been any different if it was a Tory government making it.

Which, I suppose, is kind of the point. There's no real difference bar the colour of the podium.

True, the current Tory party is closer to the Labour party of the 70s/80s but they are still further right than the current Labour government.

They're also further to the down. NuLabour may be more socialist than the Badly Drawn Trees, but it's like discussing whether a diabetic should eat Cadbury or Mars.

A lot of your first post in this thread makes for pretty depressing reading and even if the exact points on the chart are debatable it’s not far from the truth. If I was going to bang my nail to the post I guess my quadrant is Authoritarian/Left but mid way Authoritarian and just left. I am also not represented by the main parties! I do think it’s important to stand up for what you believe in but I also think it is important to be realistic about your vote and how it should be used. I could never vote Conservative even if they are quite close to Labour on the compass and I want to make sure that my vote is used to prevent them getting into power. Unfortunately we don’t have Brewster's Millions to campaign for non of the above so even with a successful facebook group it is unlikely that a protest of this kind will have a significant effect even if I do uphold its principals.

The problem is that there's nothing we can do about it for the next parliament. People will still vote for redorblueoryellow based on how they've always voted or as a protest against how they've always voted (which, for yellow, is win - because red won't ever vote for blue under any circumstances, and vice versa) regardless of the fact it's all the same!

And that's just plain wrong. Parliament is meant to represent and serve its people - and currently the three main parties represent the same, tiny proportion and seek to rule (that is, after all, what authoritarianism is) rather than serve.

We can't change it now. We can't change it for 2015. But, if we refuse to vote for the status quo but still exercise our right to vote, we can change it for 2020 and beyond. And that's pretty much what voting is for - not to say who is popular right now, but to make our country better. That effect won't be served by not voting, or voting for the same ideas with a different tie.

 

[Neal]

The problem is that there's nothing we can do about it for the next parliament. People will still vote for redorblueoryellow based on how they've always voted or as a protest against how they've always voted (which, for yellow, is win - because red won't ever vote for blue under any circumstances, and vice versa) regardless of the fact it's all the same!

And that's just plain wrong. Parliament is meant to represent and serve its people - and currently the three main parties represent the same, tiny proportion and seek to rule (that is, after all, what authoritarianism is) rather than serve.

We can't change it now. We can't change it for 2015. But, if we refuse to vote for the status quo but still exercise our right to vote, we can change it for 2020 and beyond. And that's pretty much what voting is for - not to say who is popular right now, but to make our country better. That effect won't be served by not voting, or voting for the same ideas with a different tie.

It is quite likely that there’s nothing that can be done to change the outcome of this election now as most people have already decided how they are going to vote, hopefully the turnout will be high enough to show that the nation do care about how the country is run but I wouldn’t put money on it.

Parliament should serve the people but it’s hardly surprising the leading politicians are motivated to win as the kind or person who would want to rule the country is likely to be an egomaniac as the financial rewards are quite small until their political career is over.

I really do hope that change comes but I fear it needs a leader to grab the attention of the masses in order to make it happen. This in itself saddens me as it is making the assumption that the vast majority of the nation is more concerned about style over substance. Gordon Brown has allowed his spin doctors and style gurus to tailor him into a people person but I feel he would be a lot more “popular” if he just showed his true colours, I would have loved to see him rip Piers Morgan’s head off over the ridiculous questions during that TV interview!

 

[Famine]

It has been said that you should never vote for someone who wants to be elected...

 

[daan]

So where is the Famine Party? Vote Indigo!

 

[Sureboss]

We'd end up working less than the French!

 

[Jondot]

Good job we didn't go to war on a completely fabricated - rather than misread - statistic using those same two numbers fed to us by the (Labour) government of the time...


Ideologically, the current Tory party are much closer to the Labour party when the two of us were kids than the current Labour party are - though they're both pretty much opposite. If you're a 70s/80s Labour voter, a vote for any of the main three parties is a vote for the opposite of what you stand for. Have a crack at the political compass test and see where you fall...



Actually, that's not true. Non-votes are disregarded. Spoiled votes are included. The returning officer for each constituency will not read out the number of people who didn't vote - but they will read out the number of people who voted and spoiled.

This generates a highly important political message.

The problem we currently have is that all the parties are in the same quadrant - authoritarian/right - albeit to varying degrees. This means that they are catering only to 25% of all possible ideologies. Why is that? Well, it's because all parties are led by career politicians - people who set out to be politicians, studying politics and/or law at university - guided by publicists (spin doctors). They say what they believe is popular and what will give them power, tempered by those varying degrees by what they actually believe.

Authoritarian/right is a very popular point of view. People believe they should have freedom (financial right) but there need to be regulations to stop other people spoiling it (authoritarian). It's fundamentally contradictory, but there you go. In order to get power, the politicians and publicists quite rightly believe they need to cater to that sector.

A vote for any of them validates this notion and, if polling is to be believed, 90% of all votes will go to one of the three main parties. That's a pretty strong validation - and there's only one way to counteract this.

Only 35% of people actually bother to vote, on average, so you're looking at 30% of all potential votes saying "Authoritarian/right is fine by me" and 70% saying "Meh, whatever". What's needed is a countervote to say "Authoritarian/right is not fine by me" - so you'd need another 30% of all potential voters to agree to vote for a chosen non-mainstream party (which won't happen) or to vote for no party at all.

The message this sends out to the politicians and publicists is that what they think is popular or just plain acceptable is, in fact, as likely to loose votes as it is to keep them. This generates political difference - the parties can no longer all occupy the same ground and expect to gain votes with irritating, picky points-scoring off each other. Gradually they move to occupy different ground - though the Tory party has always traditionally been authoritarian/right and is unlikely to move much.


The upshot is that this will change nothing for the next parliament. It may well change nothing for the one after that - or even the one after that - but gradually we all become represented again. We're not going to see anything but authoritarian/right being elected into government this time round. We won't see any benefits - we're now screwed into style-over-substance, populist hypocrites like Brown, Cameron and Clegg - but our kids will.

Every vote for the main three parties is a vote to retain the status quo in a variety of colours. Every non-vote is a vote of indifference. Every spoiled vote is a vote against the status quo and it is the only way to enact any form of change in the political system of our country. Though it's a very, very long game.

It's a good point, and one I will be following - additionally because I'd be stuck between voting Conservatory simply because our local Tory MP is actually very good, or Layburrr as a final do-or-die attempt not to have the scary billboard man. That and (from what I've gathered by not really paying attention) Sir Brown of Glasgow is at least behaving slightly more sensibly by setting targets to cut the deficit, when the others are continuing to behave like children with credit cards.

So there are differences, but as you say it's a bit like choosing the knife that stabs you. Which is probably why I'm tempted by the chap with poor depth perception.

 

[Sureboss]

Like the NI cuts the Tories have put forward, which will save you about nothing a year yet cost quite a bit as a deficit on the whole?

Quite frankly though, as someone who is self-employed, I laugh at the NI contributions I have to make, they don't vary on what I earn, it's a flat rate of £2.40 a week...