General Election 2010 Page 21

Quote: Godot Taxis @ April 9 2010, 1:38 AM BST

The football analogy is flawed since no football team is different to the other in conception.

View original

It wasn't an analogy as such. And of course football teams (in the eyes of the supporters) do stand for different values, have different virtues and a different footballing philosophy (whatever the objective evidence against this view - that is part of the nature of tribalism). This was, of course, not the point.

Tribalist politics is both intellectually flawed and damaging to good governance. Saying 'The Tories are on the side of the rich' or 'Labour are on the side of the poor' is not only disproved by the general centrist policies they've both practised for decades (yes, even Mrs Thatch - centrist in terms of global democratic politics certainly), but also such a simplistic argument to base one's "hunch" on who to vote for. The Liberals have pursued a more socialist agenda of wealth redistribution than any Labour government has dared to countenance in 20 years. And the Conservatives did less in terms of trade union restrictions in the 1980s than New Labour has done in their terms in office.

One may have a natural leaning towards either a party which believes in State Intervention as a social duty, or one that believes in State Facilitation of the private individual, but to say one cannot vote for a party based on the name of the bloody thing is mindless and cowardly.

If one takes a position that one could never vote for an opposition party, then one is taking the position of being wilfully irrational (and proud of it). Fortunately, there are plenty of floating voters in this country who (I would propose) are more likely to vote according to policy than out of fear of tribal rejection or embarrassment.

As a rule of thumb, anecdotally I would observe that the people I hear say "I could never vote for..." are mostly people who have the least interest or involvement in the political process. Not due to being disenfranchised, but because they simply do not care to make an effort to engage.

Politics only exists because the two political tendencies/tribes are irreconcilable.

When people say they will never vote for a particular party, this is just a hyperbolic way of stressing their belief in a particular tendancy.

If the the Labour Party and Conservative party swapped positions, for the sake of argument - say Labour began favouring regressive taxation and the Conservatives progressive then die-hard loyalists would switch.

Is it sad that I'm learning rather a lot about politics due to this thread?

Quote: Tim Walker @ December 22 2009, 3:00 AM BST

I think he's far more screwed by agreeing to hold an election. His best chance now is finding an excuse to impose marital law.

View original

Oh dear I enjoy being a bachelor

Labour have done quite a bit of redistruptive stuff. The thing is they seem really ashamed of good stuff they do.

Which is annoying.

Oh and DaveyC has suggested 2 months compulsory voluntary work for all kids. Good to see an Eton education isn't that much of an advantage.

Quote: Paul W @ April 9 2010, 8:03 AM BST

Is it sad that I'm learning rather a lot about politics due to this thread?

View original

Yes.

I saw George Osborne running near Waterloo Bridge in London the other night. I don't want to cast aspersions on his ability to be Chancellor but he runs in a very funny way.

Quote: Bert Bastard @ April 9 2010, 2:19 PM BST

I saw George Osborne running near Waterloo Bridge in London the other night. I don't want to cast aspersions on his ability to be Chancellor but he runs in a very funny way.

View original

Was Alistair Darling chasing him?

Quote: sootyj @ April 9 2010, 8:37 AM BST

Oh and DaveyC has suggested 2 months compulsory voluntary work for all kids.

View original

I thought I don't remember saying that. Then I realised I've only been to Cambridge twice in my life.

Quote: Bert Bastard @ April 9 2010, 2:19 PM BST

I saw George Osborne running near Waterloo Bridge in London the other night. I don't want to cast aspersions on his ability to be Chancellor but he runs in a very funny way.

View original

Was he running for Parliament?

An intriguing proposal. My sense of ... uhh, romanticising reality ... or something, kind of likes the idea, but in practice it would be ridiculous and stifling. http://thebluenation.com/2010/04/labours-manifesto-to-include-cadburys-law/

It is is entirely practical (the Swiss do it) and would certainly be beneficial (UK companies pay UK tax), but I doubt it would be legal under EU competition law. It would also run contrary to the anti-protectionist free trade dogma that has seen both Conservative and Labour governments consistently act against the national interest for the past three decades. (Other countries only pretend to believe in free trade when it suits them, whereas among the British political classes it is practically a religion.)

Do you not think it would hamper or otherwise put-off businesses investing in the UK at all, not just buying up?

(Well, ok, not stop investing altogether, but certainly be restrictive?)

I doubt it, and it might encourage long term investment, rather than corporate raiding levered by inflicting debt on the business being purchased.

Interesting point. Can't help feeling there's still something wrong with it. I do wish I knew more about business.