A Bully In Parliament
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
jamiemartin721  Reading 21 Oct 15 10.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Midlands Eagle at 21 Oct 2015 6.19am
Quote Red-Blue-Yellow at 20 Oct 2015 7.26pm
One option is to simply suspend the Lords’ entire business, and process bills purely through the Commons, while another is to draft a list of new Tory peers to allow the party to get its business through the upper chamber. SOURCE: Huffington Post This goes so close to being fascism as to make no difference. I'm just surprised it's so blatent.
Because its the agreed safe guard of democratic process to prevent 'tyranny of the majority'. Lords are generally appointed due to service to the state or public causes, as an 'oversight' to the commons process. That's how I see it anyhow. The Lords is far more cross party and partisan than the Commons.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 21 Oct 15 10.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote We are goin up! at 21 Oct 2015 8.27am
Quote Kermit8 at 21 Oct 2015 7.13am
Quote Midlands Eagle at 21 Oct 2015 6.19am
Quote Red-Blue-Yellow at 20 Oct 2015 7.26pm
One option is to simply suspend the Lords’ entire business, and process bills purely through the Commons, while another is to draft a list of new Tory peers to allow the party to get its business through the upper chamber. SOURCE: Huffington Post This goes so close to being fascism as to make no difference. I'm just surprised it's so blatent.
Protest is a vital part of social action, change and social justice. Its essentially missing the point of democracy if its just reduced to the idea that 'what the majority want' is right. Especially as by majority, it means seats in the House of Commons, not the population. We as a nation call ourselves democratic, but that really only means casting a vote, roughly every 1800 days, in a rigged two party system, and actually that majority actually represents the decision of around 35-40% of the country (on a good day). A good example of this failure, can be seen in the recent debate on the Assisted Suicide bill, something that between 70-90% of people seem to support. Meanwhile, in parliament, support of the bill was actually around 30%. Also that democratic process is massively biased, when parties like The Greens and UKIP, can get two seats between them, and over 20% of the vote. Representative of who, is this 'majority'.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 21 Oct 15 10.29am |
  |
|---|---|
|
In their first year, Tax Credits cost about £1 billion. Now, they cost £30 billion. It is not fair for Conservatives first to criticise Osborne for not bringing welfare spending under control – thereby making the state smaller – and then complain when he strives to rein in a feature of it that needs reform. Furthermore, the Treasury has now released figures claiming that the Chancellor’s welfare changes will save the taxpayer £15 billion next year. It claims that if these savings were not made the equivalent of around 200,000 nurses, 70,000 doctors or 325,000 teachers would have to go, and that the sum is equivalent to the entire Home Office budget. At the end of the day,If Osborne’s tax credit reductions are not to be made, spending must be cut or taxes must rise by the same amount if the deficit is to be reduced. I have said my bit. I think I should now stay out of the political debates as they will only turn into tedious WILLO threads !
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| moaner Westerham 21 Oct 15 10.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote OldFella at 20 Oct 2015 8.12pm
Quote Red-Blue-Yellow at 20 Oct 2015 7.26pm
The House of Lords could be suspended or flooded with Tory peers if it takes the 'nuclear option' of killing off George Osborne’s tax credits cuts next week, government sources have warned. Furious Conservatives are threatening retaliation if peers decide to take the unprecedented step of using a so-called ‘fatal motion’ to wreck the Chancellor’s plans to slash the welfare bill. Their warning comes after we revealed that a cross-party group of peers was set to table a 'fatal motion' to scupper the statutory instrument needed to clear the way for the cuts to come into force next April. On Monday evening the Treasury also took further steps to face down its critics, releasing analysis which it said showed Osborne's welfare reforms have saved the taxpayer £15bn a year. Crossbencher Baroness Meacher, seen as the most likely leader of the revolt in the Lords, said today that there was wide-ranging concern over the impact the tax credits changes would have on large numbers of families earning low wages. 'Fatal motions' are used very rarely as unelected peers are wary of overstepping their powers to delay an elected government’s legislation. Campaigners believe that the usual Salisbury convention, which stops the Lords from blocking a party’s plans, does not apply because the tax credits cuts were not mentioned in the Tory manifesto in May. But a fatal motion on a financial matter would be unprecedented and Tory sources are determined that the Lords would have to pay a serious political price if the Government is defeated next week. “If they do this, they will turn this from being a matter about tax credits into a huge constitutional issue of the Lords’ powers,” one insider said. One option is to simply suspend the Lords’ entire business, and process bills purely through the Commons, while another is to draft a list of new Tory peers to allow the party to get its business through the upper chamber. SOURCE: Huffington Post This goes so close to being fascism as to make no difference. I'm just surprised it's so blatent. One sentence of your own - the word is "blatant", by the way
Everyone is entitled to my opinions |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| We are goin up! Coulsdon 21 Oct 15 10.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Oct 2015 10.21am
Quote We are goin up! at 21 Oct 2015 8.27am
Funny how the left call themselves democrats until democracy doesn't give them the result they want. Protest is a vital part of social action, change and social justice. Its essentially missing the point of democracy if its just reduced to the idea that 'what the majority want' is right. Especially as by majority, it means seats in the House of Commons, not the population. We as a nation call ourselves democratic, but that really only means casting a vote, roughly every 1800 days, in a rigged two party system, and actually that majority actually represents the decision of around 35-40% of the country (on a good day). A good example of this failure, can be seen in the recent debate on the Assisted Suicide bill, something that between 70-90% of people seem to support. Meanwhile, in parliament, support of the bill was actually around 30%. Also that democratic process is massively biased, when parties like The Greens and UKIP, can get two seats between them, and over 20% of the vote. Representative of who, is this 'majority'. Cons - 36.9%
I personally like the idea of having a local MP, and I also feel that full PR would produce instable governments incapable of getting anything done. I heard someone suggest a system whereby every voter has two voting slips. 20% of MPs are elected on one slip by PR, whilst the other slip elects a local MP which sounded a bit more sensible to me.
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Red-Blue-Yellow Surrey 21 Oct 15 11.10am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote moaner at 21 Oct 2015 10.29am
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections. Sound familiar anyone..? Edited by Red-Blue-Yellow (21 Oct 2015 11.12am)
I also enjoy posting on: Love Everton Forum, the Acceptable Face of Scouse Football. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 21 Oct 15 11.11am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote We are goin up! at 21 Oct 2015 10.46am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Oct 2015 10.21am
Quote We are goin up! at 21 Oct 2015 8.27am
Funny how the left call themselves democrats until democracy doesn't give them the result they want. Protest is a vital part of social action, change and social justice. Its essentially missing the point of democracy if its just reduced to the idea that 'what the majority want' is right. Especially as by majority, it means seats in the House of Commons, not the population. We as a nation call ourselves democratic, but that really only means casting a vote, roughly every 1800 days, in a rigged two party system, and actually that majority actually represents the decision of around 35-40% of the country (on a good day). A good example of this failure, can be seen in the recent debate on the Assisted Suicide bill, something that between 70-90% of people seem to support. Meanwhile, in parliament, support of the bill was actually around 30%. Also that democratic process is massively biased, when parties like The Greens and UKIP, can get two seats between them, and over 20% of the vote. Representative of who, is this 'majority'. Cons - 36.9%
I personally like the idea of having a local MP, and I also feel that full PR would produce instable governments incapable of getting anything done. I heard someone suggest a system whereby every voter has two voting slips. 20% of MPs are elected on one slip by PR, whilst the other slip elects a local MP which sounded a bit more sensible to me. And how many of those were voting on the basis of welfare cuts? UKIP were most certainly campaigning on immigration and the EU. Here in lies the issue, we assume that someone voting for a party does so because they believe in all their issues and policy, but they don't. Most people who vote generally vote for the same party. The role of social action, is to voice dissent and opposition to in theory influence government and raise awareness of the consequences of actions. Quote We are goin up! at 21 Oct 2015 10.46am
I also feel that full PR would produce instable governments incapable of getting anything done A fair number of Conservatives have come out against Tax Credit cuts. The primary role of a democratic government is to represent the people, and provide the voice of each person in government, not to 'get things done'. Proportional representation, whilst it might result in a difficulty of a government doing what it wants, only really means that it would have to compromise its desires in order to win sufficient. Also proportional representation means that people who live in safe seats actually can be represented in government, rather than just ignored, because they don't follow either Red Capitalism is good, Blue Classic Capitalism or Yellow absolutely the best capitalism ever. A democracy that doesn't represent the people, isn't a democracy, ours is really a two party Corporate State. For democracy to be a real thing, we need to see governments serving the interests of each person, not just its voters and corporate interests (which the last three regimes have done). If that means that governments have to actually engage with other political parties, that represent people, then all the better. Turning the state over to either Labour or Conservative governments every five years usually for a decade or so, is absurd.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| chris123 hove actually 21 Oct 15 11.13am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Red-Blue-Yellow at 21 Oct 2015 11.10am
Quote moaner at 21 Oct 2015 10.29am
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections. Sound familiar anyone..? Edited by Red-Blue-Yellow (21 Oct 2015 11.12am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| chris123 hove actually 21 Oct 15 11.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Just checking the author's bona fide.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 21 Oct 15 11.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote moaner at 21 Oct 2015 10.29am
Quote OldFella at 20 Oct 2015 8.12pm
Quote Red-Blue-Yellow at 20 Oct 2015 7.26pm
The House of Lords could be suspended or flooded with Tory peers if it takes the 'nuclear option' of killing off George Osborne’s tax credits cuts next week, government sources have warned. Furious Conservatives are threatening retaliation if peers decide to take the unprecedented step of using a so-called ‘fatal motion’ to wreck the Chancellor’s plans to slash the welfare bill. Their warning comes after we revealed that a cross-party group of peers was set to table a 'fatal motion' to scupper the statutory instrument needed to clear the way for the cuts to come into force next April. On Monday evening the Treasury also took further steps to face down its critics, releasing analysis which it said showed Osborne's welfare reforms have saved the taxpayer £15bn a year. Crossbencher Baroness Meacher, seen as the most likely leader of the revolt in the Lords, said today that there was wide-ranging concern over the impact the tax credits changes would have on large numbers of families earning low wages. 'Fatal motions' are used very rarely as unelected peers are wary of overstepping their powers to delay an elected government’s legislation. Campaigners believe that the usual Salisbury convention, which stops the Lords from blocking a party’s plans, does not apply because the tax credits cuts were not mentioned in the Tory manifesto in May. But a fatal motion on a financial matter would be unprecedented and Tory sources are determined that the Lords would have to pay a serious political price if the Government is defeated next week. “If they do this, they will turn this from being a matter about tax credits into a huge constitutional issue of the Lords’ powers,” one insider said. One option is to simply suspend the Lords’ entire business, and process bills purely through the Commons, while another is to draft a list of new Tory peers to allow the party to get its business through the upper chamber. SOURCE: Huffington Post This goes so close to being fascism as to make no difference. I'm just surprised it's so blatent. One sentence of your own - the word is "blatant", by the way
I wouldn't call it Fascism in the literal sense. Fascism has generally looked after the poor, restricted corporate interests, promoted unionization and co-operative approaches. Its a right wing, authoritarian, anti-capitalist approach (which is why it has many superficial similarities to Communism). We operate a kind of Moral Fascism in this country, where we punitively punish people for being different or having different views (its not as bad as it used to be mind). Specifically this seems to be focused over the last 20 years on those unfortunate enough to be unemployed or poor. Fascism and National Socialism was built very much on resolving issues of the poor. The Nazi regime, evil as it may have been, between 1930-1939 dealt with a unimaginable recession, unemployment etc.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| gambler Kent 21 Oct 15 11.27am |
|
|---|---|
|
I predict a riot.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 21 Oct 15 11.30am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote gambler at 21 Oct 2015 11.27am
I predict a riot.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.