That is quite an impressive rant. But that is what it is. In the middle he or she says
⌠thanks to our system of elective dictatorship, the Tories can already do whatever they want, as long as they maintain party discipline, while the opposition can do nothing at all âŚ
Er ⌠yes ⌠thatâs how our political system works. Itâs not intrinsically partisan. Had labour won enough seats at the last election theyâd have been able to do the same. A change to the political system isnât likely to happen any time soon. So if we donât like government policy then all we can do is a) to argue against it with a view to changing other votersâ minds and b) to hold the government to account for it ourselves at the ballot box when the opportunity arises. Wailing that we canât cope with having to put a cross in a box or that the subject may interrupt our cat-pic-sharing and meal-photographing on Facebook doesnât exactly make the wailer look good.
And blaming the government for taking advantage of the oppositionâs uselessness is bordering on the infantile. Itâs not the governmentâs job to make the opposition electable. Thatâs the oppositionâs job.
VB
This is always what annoyed the piss out of me when people moan about the version of PR that was offered and rejected.
To paraphrase:
âIt was the wrong sortâ
Oh, right. What should it have been, then?
âSomething fairerâ, which loosely translates to âSomething where we win moreâ. As if one voting system is intrinsically better than another.
Unfortunately this part rings true.
Theresa May is holding up one side of a division and deciding that it represents the whole. Anyone who disagrees that the entire country is unified is therefore no longer proving by their very existence that this unity is fake; theyâre a contaminant, an obstacle, someone whoâs interfering with this self-declared totality. We should recognise these politics and say their name louder than ever before. Itâs fascism.
Has anyone else noticed that May looks more and more like a melted waxwork version of emperor Palpatine as the days go on?
I have no idea who that is butâŚyes.
OK
Imagine the loving those gum could give!
One non-PR alternative is the US one of course. There they have two separate elections and âshareâ the power between the president and the congress. This avoids the problem of an âelective dictatorshipâ and replaces it with the problem of âelective gridlockâ. Of course that system can be made to work e.g. Russia and, I fear, Turkey. Anyway, you pays your money and you takes your choice.
Maybe itâs just because Iâve grown up with it, but I have a preference for our system. The good thing about it is that governments actually get to do stuff. The bad thing is (quite often) the stuff they do. Once theyâve been in power long enough it is at least clear whoâs responsible though.
VB
*Just to be clear, I realise this was a rhetorical Q.
One benefit of an early election is that it will put Jeremy out of his (and our) misery sooner rather than later. The process of replacing the Tories with something better can then start.
VB
The Greens are far too right wing for him and LDâs are pretty much a bunch of facists on the Corbynometer scale of loony leftness.
Make no mistake, he bears significant blame for the situation.
I think the system is OK. The issue seems to be the people that get to vote.
Percentages would be improved by making voting compulsory.
Because that has worked so well for Oz recentlyâŚ