Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

"Whats wrong with Politics"

I just noticed that - are you suggesting that Labour coming to power by winning general elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 was in some way illegitimate, and that really the Tories should have won?

No. I'm suggest what I said that they have elevated the culture of spin to new levels, in fact historically high levels.

Their actions of public relations and their rightwing shift have more to do with the damage of politics than blogs that came about ten years after Neo Labour!

If Neo Labour are now the victim of this culture well I for one think that's sweet irony and the fuckers deserve it. :D
 
You know I'm holding out for Emily, and the sooner the better.

And despite an earlier polite warning you are still messing about with my user name for comedy purposes. It is annoying, and in breach of the FAQs, and if you persist I will report it to a moderator, but it says more about you than it does about me.

ooooo get you ! no it actualy says more about you than its does about me with your typical po faced pro nushamebore totalitarian approach to discourse report it to the mods like i care! when they order me to stop i will do so as they are the mods not you your high and mightyness:rolleyes:
 
No. I'm suggest what I said that they have elevated the culture of spin to new levels, in fact historically high levels.

"historically high levels" - Do you have a graph? :)

If they were as good at PR as their critics thought they were then the Tories wouldn't be so high in the opinion polls!
 
ooooo get you ! no it actualy says more about you than its does about me with your typical po faced pro nushamebore totalitarian approach to discourse report it to the mods like i care! when they order me to stop i will do so as they are the mods not you your high and mightyness:rolleyes:

"Discourse?" That's a fancy word for it.
 
We want people who read all kinds of newspapers, and none, to vote Labour, and to the extent that people vote according to the policies of parties, as opposed to the niceness of the candidates or celebrity endorsement, our policies are designed to appeal to a wide range of voters in all parts of the country. ?

Thats almost as funny as that post someone did about politcal radical leadership posting on these threds:D:D:D

Given that a major purpose of a serious political party is to gain and keep state power, as opposed to being an abstract debating society, is this somehow a bad thing?

so the purpose of a political party is not to serve the people who vote for it then? oh i forgot the purpose is to serve bankers...
 
"historically high levels" - Do you have a graph? :)

If they were as good at PR as their critics thought they were then the Tories wouldn't be so high in the opinion polls!

I haven't got the figures to hand but yes they increased the numbers of press officers by huge degree. Look, I'm not gonna waste my time because this is all well documented (and you're obviously being purposely obtuse), their fall had a lot to do with the fact that they illegally invaded other countries and pissed any political capital away they had. The Tories are now trying to emulate Neo Labour.
 
and you're obviously being purposely obtuse...
I apologise sincerely. You are of course completely correct about everything and I am just wasting time and being obtuse on purpose in not agreeing with everything you say. Thank you for pointing the way to enlightenment with your bright shining simple sword of truth and trusty shield of British fair play.

:p
 
Thats what we need though - our politics is a mixture of incompetence and corruption at the moment, there is no point in messing around.

The trouble is that if the political world is just filled with that kind of thing, only the most venal and thick skinned people will stay in politics.
 
so the purpose of a political party is not to serve the people who vote for it then? oh i forgot the purpose is to serve bankers...

No, the purpose of government in a democracy like the UK is to serve all the people, not just its supporters. A major purpose of a serious political party is to take power in government.
 
Part of democracy

Hazel Blears said:
She turned her fire on political "bloggers" - accusing them of fuelling disengagement by focusing on "unearthing scandals, conspiracies and perceived hypocrisy" and of being written by "people with disdain for the political system and politicians".
But isn't exposing conspiracies, scandals and corruption etc etc part of democracy, and a Good Thing? - As opposed to say just letting the corrupt sods keep on doing it unchallenged?

Part of the problem is that there is no real mechanism to clamp down on them and give them justice. True there is the occasional Jonathan Aitken sent to prison, but many people believe the majority of corrupt MPs go completely unpunished. And this has been going on for so long, there is a kind of 'Private Eye' factor where you can pile up and pile up the scandals, the corruption is so endemic that people become cynical and disengaged, and of course they have disdain for it.
 
No, the purpose of government in a democracy like the UK is to serve all the people,


like i said its role is not to serve the people who voted for it - so why should we vote nushamebore if they are not going to sewrve me but serve everyone?

youve just made the best arguement yet as to what is wrong with politics esp as to serve all in reality means to serve A B C 1s
 
Proper LOL - from Guido's blog

Yesterday afternoon Guido put in a call to Paul Richards, Hazel Blear's SpAd, after being tipped off that she was going to attack Guido in a speech later today to the Hansard Society. Guido also called the Hansard Society to arrange to attend the speech. He was told it was a closed meeting. The subject of the meeting, ironically, is political disengagement.

http://www.order-order.com/2008/11/not-nihilistic-realistic.html
 
Back
Top Bottom