What country has the best political setup?

[Nigel]

The UK is not a foreign power in NI - a view the majority of people in NI have repeatedly made fairly clear they endorse. It seems that the views of some British citizens in NI are less important than the views of others. If Sinn Fein and their supporters think their fellow citizens should becime citizens of another state, they should try being nice to them and win them over that way. I know that is quite a big thing to ask, right enough, but it's the British way.

Sinn Fein MPs should let someone else have a go if they don't want the gig, and they should give the money back - no compensation without representation. Still, everyone gets to play and hardly anyone gets hurt any more.

What when most of them(nationalists) were ethnically in the early twentieth century.
N.I. is a puppet state, set up in the name of British Imperialism after WWI in the interests of a section of the British Ruling Class that is becoming more and more irrelevent and embarassing.

Don't think anyone wants to go back to the bad old days.

 

[Gingerman]

Suppose you'd have to ask yerself which country you'd like to live in,me? always liked Denmark,tbf this aul country's not the worst either

 

[belboid]

You must forgive my ironic British sense of humour.

rubbish humour does not excuse your apparent ignorance or unconcern for basic facts regarding the history of the six counties, and the vile role of the british state therein

 

[belboid]

Suppose you'd have to ask yerself which country you'd like to live in,me? always liked Denmark,tbf this aul country's not the worst either

it isn't the worst indeed, but that's pretty different from saying its anything like the best

 

[ska invita]

I am immensely relaxed, like the majority of citizens, with the ceremonial head of state not being elected. I see advantages in the functional head of the executive being drawn from and appointed with the consent of the legislature, and I think that a separately elected executive, like they have in the US and France, would be worse than what we have here.

That may be true, but the royals serve another important negative function - they are the keystone of the class system.

Norway has a king - and i think performs the same role as the british monarchy, in fact he closely related to Elizabeth - but crucially Norway doesnt have the same class system as we suffer, and so his role within the social hierarchy is different.

I am convince it would be the best thing for Britain to dump the royals once and for all, no matter what the ins and outs of the alternatives - overall it will be for the best.

Suppose you'd have to ask yerself which country you'd like to live in,me? always liked Denmark,tbf this aul country's not the worst either

Im really happy in London for a number of reasons, but the 'system' isn;t one of them. God knows if i lived in a shitter town I would rather swap for anywhere else in Europe. It's not about where you'd like to live, which includes many factors, its about the political system in a vacuum (or at least this thread is).

Post feudal, pre-industrial(capitlaist) possibly.
CUBA

A very mixed bag Cuba - you could argue that if it were not for US interference it would have been better (less oppressive etc.), but thats a hypothetical situation.

VENEZUALA

Chavez's support of co-operatives, local democracies and general desire to involve people in the political process is exciting and worthy, but its completely impossible for me (and probably for you) to judge from here how good it really is. Perhaps time will tell... I fear its too little to make a meaningful impact.

USSR(PRE-STALIN)

Sorry Nigel, youre wrong on this one: the Bolsheviks started killing and torturing the innocent way before Stalin. It was a murderous dictatorship from the off Im afraid.

NICUARAGUA(1980'S), GERMANY(1918-1922),INDIA(UNDER NEHRU),FASO(UNDER SANKARA)

dont know enough about any of these to comment... anyone?

 

[Kaka Tim]

Obligatory personal insult. Maybe it makes you feel more confident to say such things?

No - its to alert other posters that you are here on urban as a nu-labour stooge and that everything you post should be seen in that light.

 

[Fullyplumped]

No - its to alert other posters that you are here on urban as a nu-labour stooge and that everything you post should be seen in that light.

Let's look at your use of the word "stooge" to describe me. It is a ritual personal insult.

stooge - 2 entries found.
1 stooge (noun)
2 stooge (intransitive verb)

Main Entry:
1 stooge Pronunciation: \ˈstüj\ Function: noun Etymology: origin unknown Date: 1913
1 a: one who plays a subordinate or compliant role to a principal b: puppet
2: straight man
3: stool pigeon​

Your use of the word "stooge" is meant to suggest that I am here to represent someone else's views rather than my own. That is an insult, and it is demonstrably untrue, as will be seen if you look at the range and variety of topics on which I have commented.

It is also clearly intended to try to have me excluded. You want to mark me out as someone who doesn't really belong here. That is pathetic, and a sign that you only want people in your company - in a public forum - who fit in with your way of thinking.

I have been participating in this forum for a number of years now, and most people are familiar with my views and approach to politics. While I've come across a few people who disagree with me and said so in terms, and a smaller number who are abusive, hardly any have been as blatant as you in an attempt to have me ostracised. Congratulations.

Bringing this back to the purpose of the thread, I would say that one of the things that is good about the political set up in this country is that people who hold your cliquey and elitist approach to debate always seem to fail to win political support among the people. You may have noticed this yourself.

 

[Fullyplumped]

I am convince it would be the best thing for Britain to dump the royals once and for all, no matter what the ins and outs of the alternatives - overall it will be for the best.

I would be immensely relaxed if that were to happen.

But I suspect we'd end up with a ceremonial head of state such as Stephen Fry, if we were lucky, or David and Victoria Beckham, more likely.

 

[Yossarian]

Post feudal, pre-industrial(capitlaist) possibly.
CUBA
NICUARAGUA(1980'S)
VENEZUALA
USSR(PRE-STALIN)
GERMANY(1918-1922)
INDIA(UNDER NEHRU)
BURKINA FASO(UNDER SANKARA)

l HAVEN'T UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION BUT I'LL NAME SOME COUNTRYS ANYWAY AND I FORGOT TO SAY VEITNAMM (before they turned capitlist)

 

[belboid]

But I suspect we'd end up with a ceremonial head of state such as Stephen Fry, if we were lucky, or David and Victoria Beckham, more likely.

wow, you really have a low opinion of other people don't you? So dumb they need 'clever' leaders like Blair to tell them what to do.

How horribly elitist.

 

[Fullyplumped]

wow, you really have a low opinion of other people don't you? So dumb they need 'clever' leaders like Blair to tell them what to do.

How horribly elitist.

Well, what do you think would happen if the monarchy ended? I think there would be a demand for a head of state, but I also think that this wouldn't fundamentally change the constitutional balance and the prime minister would remain as functional head of the executive. I don't get your point about 'clever' leaders like Blair to tell them what to do. Assuming he or she was ceremonial, like the president of Ireland or Germany, as opposed to functional, lke the president of France or the USA, do you think we'd get a serious grown up public intellectual, or someone off the telly? Who do you think people would vote for?

What about Nicholas Parsons?

 

[belboid]

my point was, as I'm sure was clear to most, that by thinking that the electorate was so daft they would vote in a TV personality, you are being quite horribly patronising and elitist.

If there were a ceremonial HoS, rather than one with powers, which isn't something I am advocating anyway, but if there were, I imagine it would be a 'serious' personality, rather than a frivolous one. Maybe someone as shit as Richard Branson, but more likely someone like Livingstone.

And, no, I dont see how you 'shrug off the insult and stick to the point'. Tho I do see how you have a very high opinion of yourself, quite why I cannot fathom as all you do is fudge, obfuscate and issue forth bland inanities that could come straight from Milbank. Soz.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Let's look at your use of the word "stooge" to describe me. It is a ritual personal insult.

stooge - 2 entries found.
1 stooge (noun)
2 stooge (intransitive verb)

Main Entry:
1 stooge Pronunciation: \ˈstüj\ Function: noun Etymology: origin unknown Date: 1913
1 a: one who plays a subordinate or compliant role to a principal b: puppet
2: straight man
3: stool pigeon​

Your use of the word "stooge" is meant to suggest that I am here to represent someone else's views rather than my own. That is an insult, and it is demonstrably untrue, as will be seen if you look at the range and variety of topics on which I have commented.

It is also clearly intended to try to have me excluded. You want to mark me out as someone who doesn't really belong here. That is pathetic, and a sign that you only want people in your company - in a public forum - who fit in with your way of thinking.

I have been participating in this forum for a number of years now, and most people are familiar with my views and approach to politics. While I've come across a few people who disagree with me and said so in terms, and a smaller number who are abusive, hardly any have been as blatant as you in an attempt to have me ostracised. Congratulations.

Bringing this back to the purpose of the thread, I would say that one of the things that is good about the political set up in this country is that people who hold your cliquey and elitist approach to debate always seem to fail to win political support among the people. You may have noticed this yourself.

But you are an active member of the labour party and your posts on political matters routinley promote a new-labour loyalist agenda (from defending their latest corruption, incompetance, venality etc to attacking thier critics) So theres always a whiff of stoogery about your posts.
How pointing this out is 'elitist' is beyond me. And it doesn't exculde you from posting.

As for winning 'politcal support' - in the real world people are utterly disconnected and alientated from the political elite that govern this country and that you willingly represent/collude with

Its a reflection of the weakness and dysfunctional nature of our political system that such a situation has developed and is so hard to rectify.

 

[teqniq]

Its a reflection of the weakness and dysfunctional nature of our political system that such a situation has developed and is so hard to rectify.

Save for some sort of revolution, something I feel is presently a laughable fantasy, electoral reform as has been mentioned would seem to be the only realistic way forward - and even that's hard to see ever happening.

 

[Errol's son]

Angola

Only the MPLA can boast 82% in the most recent parliamentary elections which were described as fair by the SADC and by others as potentially a model for Africa.

 

[Fullyplumped]

But you are an active member of the labour party and your posts on political matters routinley promote a new-labour loyalist agenda (from defending their latest corruption, incompetance, venality etc to attacking thier critics) So theres always a whiff of stoogery about your posts.
How pointing this out is 'elitist' is beyond me. And it doesn't exculde you from posting.

As for winning 'politcal support' - in the real world people are utterly disconnected and alientated from the political elite that govern this country and that you willingly represent/collude with

Its a reflection of the weakness and dysfunctional nature of our political system that such a situation has developed and is so hard to rectify.

In other words I stick up for what I believe in. Shockin'.

And you are better than me.

 

[Fullyplumped]

my point was, as I'm sure was clear to most, that by thinking that the electorate was so daft they would vote in a TV personality, you are being quite horribly patronising and elitist.

If there were a ceremonial HoS, rather than one with powers, which isn't something I am advocating anyway, but if there were, I imagine it would be a 'serious' personality, rather than a frivolous one. Maybe someone as shit as Richard Branson, but more likely someone like Livingstone.

And, no, I dont see how you 'shrug off the insult and stick to the point'. Tho I do see how you have a very high opinion of yourself, quite why I cannot fathom as all you do is fudge, obfuscate and issue forth bland inanities that could come straight from Milbank. Soz.

High opinion of myself. Also shockin'.

 

[Kaka Tim]

In other words I stick up for what I believe in. Shockin'.

And you are better than me.

You believe in being a nu-labour lickspittle.

Which makes you an enemy of democracy, cheerleader for war criminals and active participant in the corporate rape of this country.

Nae offence like.

 

[Fullyplumped]

You believe in being a nu-labour lickspittle. Which makes you an enemy of democracy, cheerleader for war criminals and active participant in the corporate rape of this country. Nae offence like.

See, that's what is so good about the political set up in this country.

People like you can curl your lip and snarl your paranoid nonsense at people over the internet without fear of any adverse consequences, and people like me can see people like you try to sell your daft wee papers, if that's what you do, and watch people just walk past as if you weren't even there.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Rather wolfie smith than a Peter Mandleson wanner-be

 

[Kaka Tim]

.....

 

[belboid]

High opinion of myself. Also shockin'.

oh look, the cleverest person on urban, with the award winning prose, can't respond to the political points put to her - again - and resorts to attempts at cheap laughs.

There is no content to your posts FP, just a bland defence of the status quo. I wish you would actually 'stick up for what you believe in', but you dont. Maybe that passes for being ever so clever in nu labour circles, but back in reality, and even on the internet, it just makes you look like a bit of a weasel.

At least you pretty much admit to being an elitist who looks down on others tho.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well, what do you think would happen if the monarchy ended? I think there would be a demand for a head of state, but I also think that this wouldn't fundamentally change the constitutional balance and the prime minister would remain as functional head of the executive. I don't get your point about 'clever' leaders like Blair to tell them what to do. Assuming he or she was ceremonial, like the president of Ireland or Germany, as opposed to functional, lke the president of France or the USA, do you think we'd get a serious grown up public intellectual, or someone off the telly? Who do you think people would vote for?

What about Nicholas Parsons?

Your two examples rather undermine the point you're trying to make. Ireland and Germany invariably elect heavyweight intellectuals as president.

As for the president's power, it is of course limited. However, as guardian of the constitution, they will have something to say when, for instance, a prime minister attempts to abolish other parts of government because they don't like them, as Thatcher did with the GLC. The prime minister of the UK has extraordinary powers because the constitutional head of state has no legitimacy and dare not exercise her theoretical power. In effect, a pm with a large majority can do whatever they like, trampling on any 'rights' they please as they rule through the impotent monarch's royal prerogative.

 

[Nigel]

l HAVEN'T UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION BUT I'LL NAME SOME COUNTRYS ANYWAY AND I FORGOT TO SAY VEITNAMM (before they turned capitlist)

A friend of mine recentely came back from Vietnam, said the mindset of the people was the most capitalist that he had come across(travelling throughout South East Asia). Mixed with 1984 big brother Socialist Realist posters & obscure modern art.
No I purposely missed out Maoist orientated governments.

 

[Nigel]

I did'nt misunderstand the question, but should have been clearer.
These countries governments had the spark and embryonic potential to shine as examples to the world of a better way in which human beings can live.
However they did not succeed for one reason or another.

 

[newbie]

So far Australia is coming out tops. Shame about the spiders.

 

[Kaka Tim]

So far Australia is coming out tops. Shame about the spiders.

And a legacy of genocidal racism.

 

[Belushi]

So far Australia is coming out tops. Shame about the spiders.

Two words, Gough Whitlam.

 

[newbie]

well yes. the legacy is there, can't be erased but doesn't necessarily impose on the current system. It might do, I don't know enough to comment.

 

[Kaka Tim]

oh look, the cleverest person on urban, with the award winning prose, can't respond to the political points put to her - again - and resorts to attempts at cheap laughs.

There is no content to your posts FP, just a bland defence of the status quo. I wish you would actually 'stick up for what you believe in', but you dont. Maybe that passes for being ever so clever in nu labour circles, but back in reality, and even on the internet, it just makes you look like a bit of a weasel.

At least you pretty much admit to being an elitist who looks down on others tho.

This