The linked long term phenomena of falling electoral turnout and a decreasing percentage of those who do vote, voting for the two main parties, leaves politicians in power with the active support of an increasingly small minority of the population. To date this has not seriously impacted on consent – the Majority are apathetic, and devoid both of interesting sources of useful political information, and of social cohesion. Membership of organisations of horizontal solidarity is also in long term decline.
I would love to see an attempt at long term quantification of the difference between the parties in terms of the manifesto policies they offer. I have no doubt that there will be a very sharp reduction in difference, or rather policy convergence between the parties. If you look at 1911 – social insurance, pensions, power of the hereditary aristocracy, 1945 – nationalisation of major industries, initiation of the NHS and full welfare state, and 1983 – privatisation, nuclear weapons – there were very real and sharp political differences that offered voters a distinct ideological choice. The country – and your own future – could be recognisably different dependent on for whom you voted.
The last two times our government changed parties, the new party came in to pledge to continue the fiscal measures already projected by the treasury under its predecessors. Anyone who believes the Treasury would be fundamentally different under Balls or Osborne is delusional, and responding to tribalism not real difference. Who introduced tuition fees? New Labour. Who accelerated the “marketization” of the NHS? New Labour. Who vastly expanded PFI? New Labour. Who bailed out the banks? New Labour.
In effect, the parties offer exactly the same neo-con policies. NATO, Trident, Occupation of Afghanistan, Privatisation, Tuition Fees – the only apparent alternative at the last election came from the Lib Dems, and the electorate grasped at it in larger numbers than a third party had ever received before, something we have quickly forgotten. The reason that we have forgotten it is that Clegg, who was never any kind of Liberal, dumped the entire radical heritage of his party as soon as he came to power.
There is a much wider point to what happened to the Lib Dems. Two other changes – the introduction of PR for the European Parliament, and the large increase in expenses for MP’s staff – had made a radical change to that party. Lib Dem conferences were suddenly places of power dressing, not woolly jumpers. A great many young professional politicos – MPs research assistants, and staffers from Brussels – were all over the place. Bright, presentable, highly paid, most of them had no connection with liberalism, had never read John Stuart Mill or Hazlitt, had no idea who Lloyd George was and cared less. They had latched on to a rung of paid political work, had become part of the political class – that was the entire purpose of their activity. The woolly jumpered chap who had campaigned about paving stones in Salisbury and passionately wanted to abolish Trident and adopt green energy became sidelined, an amusing anachronism, the subject of the jokes of the sophisticates.
Of course, their focus groups showed that the people want policies which the ever shrinking ownership of the mass media promotes, because they are the only policies they have ever heard of. But the people no longer trust the ownership of the media, and the expenses scandal caused a much-needed scepticism of the appalling political class. People are desperate for leaders who look honest and say something different.
So do not despise UKIP supporters. They are not vicious racists. They are in fact brighter than those stupid enough to continue voting for the three neo-con parties, despite having their lives crippled for the next three decades to pay unconceivable sums to the bankers. The UKIP voters at least wish to punish the political class and wish to hear of some different policies.
The problem is that the only alternative of which the mainstream media is prepared to inform them is Mr Farage and his simple anti-foreigner maxims. Many of the bankers are keen to leave the EU, as Nigel Lawson told us. So if people want an alternative, that is the one they will be offered. Only in Scotland have people been offered a more radical alternative – and while I do not wish to exaggerate the economic radicalism of the SNP, they are markedly to the left of Westminster on issues like tuition fees, healthcare and PFI.
The great question of the day is, how to put before the population, in a way that they will notice, a radical alternative other than simple right wing populism. I have a strong belief that there remains a real desire in society for a more social policy, for a major and real check on the huge divergence between rich and poor, for good public services, for a pacific foreign policy, and for leaders not just in it for the money or to promote wealthy interests. But how do you get that message to people?
UPDATE
From comments made, there must be an ambiguity about this article which I don’t see myself. I made this clarification in a comment and I add it here for certainty:
Of course UKIP are not a real alternative. I said “do not despise UKIP supporters”, not “do not despise UKIP”. UKIP are a false “alternative” dangled by the mainstream media and the bankers. But the support for them is evidence that the public do very much want some alternative. I shall append this to the article as it must be more ambiguous than I thought.
@Komodo, 22 May, 2013 – 12:56 pm
O/T, but I am curious regarding this,
In what way, and on what grounds? Personally, he has always come across as a rather (if not), very decent person, not least when you read accounts by his children?
But my memory or my mind may have failed me here…
And I have no problem in expressing my support for the cause of the Chagossians = particularly since they are seeking to promote it using wholly democratic means
http://www.chagossupport.org.uk/how-you-can-help
“The reason why I get so upset about many of the statements here is not necessarily with the stated end goals but it is with the lack of indentification of any democratic means as to how those objectives will be achieved”
Thoughtful statement on the whole, RD.
I agree Democracy is the best form of government. Part of the problem is we have created a convenient form of same, which allows detachment from accountability for the citizenry. In a direct democracy, the People vote as opposed to Representative Democracy wherein we vote for proxies we trust with the agenda. That’s where the problem is. The reason, imo, many here deride the politicos as inept, or worse, corrupt and proffer no solution to their behaviors is because there are so many shenanigans said politicos use to avoid their Public service oaths The triangulations of back room deals and closed meetings make the electorate cynical and apathetic.
So, what to do? Volunteer at local level to develop and campaign for candidates most likely to carry out their duties with some consistent integrity. Get involved and get others involved. “All politics, are LOCAL” is a famous quote that applies here.
Monitor said candidates after election and hold them accountable for their voting record. Replace, as necessary. Part of the reason these guys go rogue after election is the fervent wish to be re-elected. When you haul enough of them out of office for non-performance, the message will be clear to the rest of them. Now in districts which are of a different bent, politically, maybe one you don’t agree with, it’s fair to apply the same standard. However, I too am comfortable, but that is a relative measure of the quality of life. I am not rich. But I am not wanting. Yet, I do think there is some ‘noblesse oblige’ I need to display for those not as comfortable as I.
What a loads of bollocks
As for the rest of shite about new schools and hospital: PFI (ie keeping the expenditure off the books and leasing the premises from privateers whom have already built up the place with an inherent obsolescence, looking forward to the subsequent upgrades at enormous costs to the tax payer eventually).
So far as the wage increases; which fucking planet are you on mate? The real earnings of the plebeians has gone back to be equivalent as the years after the war, coupled with the massive money printing frenzy sold as Quantitative Easing, i robbing the poor to pay the rich/banksters/financiers/leeches, anyone who had saved has seen their savings disappear down the shitter.
This is no dissidence, it is more like a fucking propaganda drone to reinforce the shite that the corporate media has been pumping out under the tutelage of the SIS and the governments combined. Clearly thumping the same message home will eventually sink in to the brains of the gold fish is the ethos that is not going to be let go as yet.
That’s a weird one Fedup – the Phoenix Free School in Oldham.
It was first mooted in 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18832576
turned down in 2012 and has now been approved by Poison Gove following assistance from the DfE officials on the application.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-22621108
The head Tom Burkard, a former school teacher and a ‘military instructor’, is quoted in the 2011 BBC piece as coming ‘from the Centre for Policy Studies’, a Thatcher and Keith Joseph creation.
Lo and behold here is Poison Gove delivering the CPS Keith Joseph Memorial Lecture to the ‘City’ being introduced by Saatchi.
http://www.cps.org.uk/publications/reports/the-2013-keith-joseph-memorial-lecture/
This is their board. http://www.cps.org.uk/about/board/
Milords Saatchi and Blackwell, the Marquess of Salisbury, Niall Ferguson, Rocco Forte, two from Goldman Sachs, Nelson from the Spectator and four others representing PR, property, private equity and previous Tory governments.
A far cry from poor kids in Oldham who are going to do some drills and be subject to a militarized regime to save them ‘getting into crime’.
‘shun. By the right, quick march…….
Here is Gove eulogizing Sir Keith Joseph. 1 hr. I could bear just about the first ten minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xPEvyY_QibA
I was about to remind the ResDiss of the vast debt (£300bn) that he, his children and grandchildren will be repaying to the shark investors, speculators, lawyers, accountants, et al for the >next 30 years as these debts for NuLabour schools and hospitals are sold and bought. At the end they will be slums, being mostly ticky tacky constructions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/05/pfi-contracts-list
Full data of the debts and contracts.
I believe that PFI contracts are still being entered into by Gideon and his mob.
April Showers, this latest murder of Ibragim Todashev by the FBI shows just what we are up against when it comes to dealing with the excesses of Western police states.
Todashev knew the elder alleged Boston bomber, the one who was killed outright so he would not be able to explain why he went off the rails ultimately while working with the Bureau in entrapping Chechen terrorists.
Todashev knew much about this, even talking to Tamerlan after the bombings, and he became increasing angry while being interrogated by the Bureau about it, so it took him out like how French so=called counter terrorists took out Mohammad Merah after the Toulouse massacre.
You can always get a suspect to fight back if you come calling during the wee hours of the morning, and break down the door in trying to make an arrest.
I am particularly interested in the case as the FBI, it seems, tried again to entrap in crime by calling me twice, and asking me if I was one Stephen Nickerson – who I suspect Todashev told the Bureau knew about the Boston bombings,
Of course, I am not Nickerson, and have never used that alias or any other one.
The Bureau was just on another fishing trip to catch me, as in the ‘Jihad Jane’ fiasco, but I never answer any of its queries.
Be really interesting if we hear more about one Steve Nickerson being involved in this latest counter terrorist fiasco.
ot – The new Pope sounds good (!)
Culture is the foundation of Peace
So Fedup – what do you propose? More of the usual gold fish mouthings is my guess rather than anything which is constructive and workable? We know waht you are against – but what are you for?
Ben Franklin
By all means there should be a discussion about what forms of democracy work best – I would be a little more circumspect about Direct Democracy – I am not sure that it can handle the large number of decisions and detail that is required in modern government or that non elected elements wouldn’t do everything they could to sway short term decisions in their power. I also suspect that most people would prefer to leave the smaller and more detailed decisions to others . That said I could see systems where say decisions are required to be sent for wider consultation when say a voter panel expresses a certain level of dissent. There also needs to be a lot more thought about the roles of second houses (at least here in the UK where it is appointed/hereditary) and local/regional government offering checks and balances.
On the selection of reprsentatives, I agree that regular reselection and contact with the voters is one of the best controls out – and indeed there is a lot to be said for annual (or more regular) parlaiments, which is the one unsatisfied demand, of the Chartists. Of course in the UK we have just made a backward step from this where we now have fixed 5 year parliaments as a result of the coalition programme for Craig voted, even though none of us were offered such an alternative by any party in the General Election. We also have something of a problem in the UK in that many parliamentary candidates are creatures of the political machine rather than having experience of worked elsewhere – perhaps we need some qualifying criteria, but this does run into the problem of someone else other than the electorate having a say in what constitutes an acceptable candidate.
And can you believe that I no sooner posted the above than I received another call from the Bureau, assuring me that it was official business, and asking whether or not I am one Stephen Nickerson.
Can’t deny that it isn’ t plugged in worldwide 24/7.
April Showers
So how else would you have raised the money to pay for the schools and hospitals without incurring debts of some form? Expropriations I presume or wouldn’t you bother at all?
I am more than happy to criticise the terms on which PFI debts were raised and the near complete failure of Treasury officials to drive a proper bargain with the sharks providing the finance (in many cases due to ignorance and worse on their part) – especially since I almost certainly know a lot more about the subject than yourself (e.g I think you will find the lawyers and accountants were in nearly all cases paid up front). But perhaps rather than criticising you could suggest some constructive alternatives?
RD;
“– I would be a little more circumspect about Direct Democracy – I am not sure that it can handle the large number of decisions and detail that is required in modern government”
Quite impractical from the standpoint of Joe Lunchbucket who hasn’t the time to familiarize himself with the ‘Devil’s Details’.
But having some form of incentive for voters to ‘volunteer’ (like a jury foreman) who acts as ombudsman for a District to assess or make recommendations for legislation based on polls and research, could work. Yet I feel this is harder than just creating grass-level organization within the existing Representative system.
” non elected elements wouldn’t do everything they could to sway short term decisions in their power.”
This is part of the problem which can be corrected through savvy and rapid communication with the electorate through activist orgs. Networking through various medias is key. Transparency is paramount before the nefarious elements objecting to change for selfish purpose see their mugs on streetlight pole ‘Wanted for Crimes against the People’ posters. Of course, I am being rhetorical. When the voter sees a direct connection between their plight and the actions of many working against their interests, the chips fall. The battle for hearts and minds is won by those who don’t quit or give up. Persistence, not talent, is why most of these thugs get their way. Double-down on their persistence.
@ resident dissident – 12:22 pm : re Your comment “Given his attachment to the historical roots of liberalism perhaps Craig might wish to explain how the Scottish Enlightenment came about after the Act of Union and how none of its major figures appeared to have argued for its revocation”. A very interesting comment if I may say so. I don’t know Graig’s view, but I personally don’t see any contradiction.
My view is that the Union worked well for Scotland in the 19th and 18th centuries and that the major figures of the 18th century “Enlightenment” were smart enough to understand this. They were pro-union and anti-Jacobite. The Union brought economic opportunities that resulted in boom time for great cities like Glasgow; and the 15 & 45 Jacobite rebellions, great in romance and song, made no sense to these rational thinkers. But the times have changed and the Union no longer works well. The once great industries have collapsed. Across the UK everything economic has been centralized to the disadvantage not only of Scotland but of the English regions. Scotland now has a chance (perhaps a last chance) to put this foolish centralization into reverse and, with oil, the money to do so.
The “enlightenment” were Rational Thinkers, and just as Rational Thought once backed Union, so Rational Thought would back independence today.
“You do seem to have a fixation about obesity, Fred. And you appear to be on the verge of stereotyping Scots on the basis of lipid content. Glad you’ve got nothing more damning to say about them or Alex, anyway. ”
Point is revolutions are for people with no food in their bellies not for people who holiday in Florida. Being more prosperous is important if it means not being hungry but not if it just means buying more Buckie.
Successful revolutions are driven by need not by greed.
1- A very serious curbing of the powers of the prime minister, with respect to declaration of war, patronage of MPs, appointment of peers.
2- A very serious overhaul of the electoral process with respect to delineation of powers of setting electoral boundaries, away from any political operative, or the incumbent government. Introduction of proportional presentation without the single transferable vote element.
3- Return of decision making power to parliament.
4- No more stuffing the legislative committees with uninterested MPs who will be sitting at the back and getting on with their work, whilst the legislation is getting debated/amened, to be put to vote on the floor.
5- Re regulation of financial institutions, and setting of minimum floors for mandatory investment within UK on: plant, buildings, workforce training, modernisation.
6- Fixed term parliamentary period to stop the bribery of the electorate by the incumbent government along with the Punch and Judy show that goes with setting the election dates.
7- A bill of rights, and a written constitution.
These are just a few pointers that will start the ball rolling in the direction of “democracy”. The sloganeering about “democracy” more and more sounds hollow, and is akin to yea olde repressive Nazi, or Communist regimes.
The fact that elected MPs have little or no power, and are entirely dependent on the patronage of their relevant party leaders, only reinforces the current status quo, in which the SIS are running wild, and the state within the state is governing regardless of the plebeians wishes or aspirations.
It is sickening to see the all out song and dance about fucking democracy, when there is none.
Fedup @ 6:25
That’s the WHAT….but HOW is it done?
Can only be done through a fucking miracle.
The current vested interests cannot afford to allow even the least of the changes, for these know very well; upon accession of people to power, the golden egg laying goose will in no time stop laying the gold eggs.
The notions of full employment, viable social services, and adequately modernised infrastructure, will only demolish the current status quo.
Video of London attacker just up at ITN – http://www.itv.com/news/
Resident Dissident 5.59pm How else to finance building schools and hospitals….
A. Borrow in the usual way. PFI is twice as expensive.
Also were all the brand new buildings and services needed. What about repairing and extending the existing stock. Cheaper and would have given employment.
http://scriptonitedaily.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/all-in-it-together-how-government-is-handing-ownership-of-our-schools-and-hospitals-to-banks/
PFI is used for many other public works. See that Guardian spreadsheet.
For instance, Surrey CC has contracted the replacement of street lighting via PFI with Skanska. Value £79m ! http://www.skanska.co.uk/Projects/Project/?pid=342&plang=en-gb
They will operate and maintain the scheme until 2035. Goodness know what charges will acrrue to the Surrey taxpayers over the next 22 years.
There’s more. http://www.group.skanska.com/en/Projects/Search-project/
John Reid – and Theresa May
Of course it’s “sickening and barbaric”!
But it’s no less sickening and barbaric than what those so-called “rebels” that you’re backing in Syria are doing. And it’s no less sickening and barbaric than drone attacks, just because you don’t see the results up close and personal on the ground.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630304
and John Reid – the idea that currently serving British soldiers are “protecting you” day after day, is a fiction. Pure fiction.
Since an immigrant wielding a knife was killed by police, some days ago, Sweden has been engulfed in rioting, with young people mainly joining in the rioting. There are other sources and I wonder what Arbeds take would be on the symptoms of this eruption.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/21/sweden-riots-4-arrested-stockholm-suburb_n_3312512.htm
Giles – I can assure you that I mean racist in its only sense. I happen to work with actual workers, the majority of whom use words like coon, raghead, etc. on a daily basis and think nothing of suggesting that people who have different coloured skin or speak a different language should be deported, shot or gassed and these are the same people who vote UKIP (mainly because there is no BNP presence in this part of the world). If this surprises you, I suggest you seek out some Sun/Daily Mail readers and ask them for their opinions on a few things.
John O’Connor, former commander of the Flying Squad, warns there is no way of knowing if this is “a one-off incident”.
He tells BBC News: “It seems to me that this is a departure from the established type of attacks that you see.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630304
Yes, I wouldn’t be too worried about looking for the backers – the planners and financiers. Doesn’t seem like there was much planning involved?
Both of the attackers were shot by police. One is dead. One in hospital, as far as I know.
God help the guy who was attacked. RIP.
Ref the savage murder of a member of the armed forces in Woolwich this afternoon.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630304
1908: The BBC’s Nick Robinson tweets: “To those offended by my describing the attacker as of “Muslim appearance” – I was directly quoting a Whitehall source quoting the police.”
He was a study in severity. He repeated the phrase ‘of Muslim appearance’ at least twice in the 6pm News on BBC1. The T word was used too and we were reminded of 7/7 and other terrorist attacks.
Mrs May has called a COBRA meeting. Hammond was interviewed. Cameron is returning early from seeing Hollande to attend the COBRA meeting. They have just held a joint press conference.
Miliband is cancelling a visit to Germany.
Sky News have had John Reid speaking from their Westminster studio. I will leave what he said to your imagination.
PS
What does a Muslim look like?
What does a Christian look like?
PPS I am not defending the murder just critical of the reaction by the media and the politicians.
Has the UK reinforced Boston? The drift indicates yea.
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-05-22/exclusive-video-man-with-bloodied-hands-speaks-at-woolwich-scene/
Terrrrrror – I am recording the initial responses.
Restraint from Frank Gardner.
‘1936: The BBC’s security correspondent, Frank Gardner, says there are still a lot of questions to be answered about the motivation behind the Woolwich attack.
People should keep an open mind until more information emerges, he adds.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630304
The 1982 Hyde Park bombing came back into the news today with the charging of an Irishman, John Downey. That’s 31 years ago.
John Anthony Downey in court over 1982 IRA Hyde Park bombing
Dead horses covered up and wrecked cars at the scene of carnage in Rotten Row, Hyde Park, after an IRA bomb exploded as the Household Cavalry was passing
Horses were also killed by the bomb which exploded as the Household Cavalry passed
A man has appeared in court charged with the murder of four soldiers in the 1982 IRA bombing in Hyde Park, London.
John Anthony Downey, 61, of County Donegal, Ireland has been charged with the murders of Roy John Bright, Dennis Richard Anthony Daly, Simon Andrew Tipper and Geoffrey Vernon Young.
The four members of the Household Cavalry were travelling to Buckingham Palace when they were killed.
Mr Downey was arrested at Gatwick Airport on Sunday.
/..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22625104
John Quatermass Reid whose doctorate was gained through his explorations of socialism in Benign. He used to carry his make shift rostrum around with him and get on with his numerous pontifications about al kaidy whilst in charge of home office. As ever he has been pulled out of the cupboard to get on the beeb and give us all a re run of his numerous pontifications.
Meanwhile back at the ranch with shades of Jean Charles de Menezes and his puffer jacket with wires hanging off! The story of the Woolich attack in no time is tied to Islamic Taayyyrrrrrooorists, that is without much information at the disposal of the enunciators.
Hence anyone, just surfing the net will see the poison and bile that is getting poured on the “Muslims” which is not racist by any means (as per the current conventions), and now we can all wait and see what sort of attacks will be carried out on the Muslims in reprisals dished out by the hatemongers. Surprisingly the debates about killing Muslims are going on , evidently without any intervention of the SIS.
@Fedup
“6- Fixed term parliamentary period to stop the bribery of the electorate by the incumbent government along with the Punch and Judy show that goes with setting the election dates.”
I am fairly sure this has already been done (even RD agrees), though of course after setting the maximum term, our politicos, Westminster Village idiot scribes and wonks have managed to create the impression that it’s a minimum term instead, meaning that once in they will hang on for the full five years, to the last day of it, come what may -deliberately misconstrued its presentation to convince many that five years is an entitlement, which they must ‘dutifully’ serve. Instead of constraining them to five years maximum it has actually entrenched them for the full duration, however loathsome their conduct might get. It was only six years maximum previously by convention, so isn’t really much of a change, no-one could go on indefinitely, except maybe an ’emergency’ coalition for an entirely fabricated crisis of their own making. In practice then it is completely ineffectual as far as democratisation goes, a government can still throw the towel in early and collapse or be paralysed by infighting for a successor executive, and parliament can still have a a vote of no confidence, and with no counter vote (a cancelling vote of new found confidence in a new administration formed or a policy change), within a specific time a general election is automatic as if the five years were up. Neither of course can a fixed term parliament compel a collapsing government to keep governing if they decide they won’t or find they can’t do, or are obstructed from having everything their own way. For MPs, it was a sly way of giving them job security, a means of guaranteeing five years salary and having made personal financial arrangements on that basis, makes a no-confidence vote far less likely as instead they all have a strong incentive to keep clinging on to the bitterest end.
I’m not sure too all how any of this would stop the bribery of the sectors of the electorate, by for example more tax cuts for the stupendously wealty, or the greater number of aspirant wannabes, daft enough to delude themselves they can be one of the in-set too. It doesn’t -won’t have this effect at all in practice. If anything giveaway budgets were a sure telltale of an imminent election if past the third quarter of a parliament’s life.
Chartists’ annual parliaments as was mentioned above, giving them no chance to get too comfortable, and with incumbents disbarred from standing, seems the obvious best option.
Abolishing Westminster entirely seems worth considering too, move the English parliament and seat of government to the Midlands or somewhere further North or more central. Start afresh.
It is not a fixed term; it leaves the of calling the election date at the disposal of the incumbent government. Fixed term means; exactly upon four years term there will be an election taking place. This will effectively strip the carpetbaggers from their stop, go economic shenanigans; bribing the gold fish to “vote” for the incumbents again.