You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Thank you Angela Rayner
October 22 2021 4.42pm

Thank you Angela Rayner

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 8 of 10 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

 

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 28 Sep 21 10.16am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I actually hopes she takes over from Starmer.

The rule changes are a complete two fingers to their membership.

The leader of a party really should reflect it.

I have long suspected that you are not a true believer in representative democracy, and this confirms it.

A party leader ought not simply reflect the current views of its paid up membership. They should lead them to a position where the Party can command enough votes from the electorate to actually achieve things, and not just blow hot air.

Leaders should lead. In a representative democracy, they aren't followers. They aren't delegates, they are representatives, just as their MPs are. Their job is to try to give their membership what they need, and not what they want.

The left of the Labour Party has long rejected this approach, and the consequences are obvious. Until such ideas are defeated, they will not regain power. As not having an effective opposition impacts us all, this is really important, even if you think having endless right wing Tory governments a good idea.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 12.51pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Apparently because I believe that a political party should be led by those that the membership....should have a leader that they believe in and want....according to WE means you don't believe in 'representative democracy'.

Well, I certainly don't believe that a small number of MPs (though they should have some say) corporate donors, rich individuals, the media, or block votes from unions should get effective control of party leaderships by lobbying and fat checks....no it should be the rank and file of that party. Now that is democracy.

Then the wider country gets to choose which party they prefer.

I certainly have numerous criticism of democracy...Obviously I'm a critic of WE's preferred elitist 'Bloomberg' like first form...many within democracy who support it also have. However I don't believe the above makes me some mortal enemy.

I'm a believer in meritocracy, but that does not mean that I believe elites have the best interests of those they control....their chattel so to speak.


Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Sep 2021 12.57pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jeeagles Flag 28 Sep 21 1.10pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I have long suspected that you are not a true believer in representative democracy, and this confirms it.

A party leader ought not simply reflect the current views of its paid up membership. They should lead them to a position where the Party can command enough votes from the electorate to actually achieve things, and not just blow hot air.

Leaders should lead. In a representative democracy, they aren't followers. They aren't delegates, they are representatives, just as their MPs are. Their job is to try to give their membership what they need, and not what they want.

The left of the Labour Party has long rejected this approach, and the consequences are obvious. Until such ideas are defeated, they will not regain power. As not having an effective opposition impacts us all, this is really important, even if you think having endless right wing Tory governments a good idea.

Party members seem to be the biggest hindrance most MP's have. If you are willing to pay up then it's most likely you are on the extremes of the party and not part of the centrist majority.

The issue for Party leaders is to try and get their membership to agree to what's best for the country, rather than just doing what the membership wants. In fairness, its not easy.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 1.25pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

Party members seem to be the biggest hindrance most MP's have. If you are willing to pay up then it's most likely you are on the extremes of the party and not part of the centrist majority.

The issue for Party leaders is to try and get their membership to agree to what's best for the country, rather than just doing what the membership wants. In fairness, its not easy.

Isn't the point of joining a political party that you want a particular style of politics?

If there is a 'centrist majority' then why don't they create a centrist party and this giant majority can vote for them.

Let Labour or indeed every party be the party that its rank and file paying supporters want it to be....not rich lobbyists and elites.

As for your concern over extremism. Why would that matter? If a party is considered extreme then they won't win elections will they?

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 28 Sep 21 1.43pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


Isn't the point of joining a political party that you want a particular style of politics?

If there is a 'centrist majority' then why don't they create a centrist party and this giant majority can vote for them.

Let Labour or indeed every party be the party that its rank and file paying supporters want it to be....not rich lobbyists and elites.

As for your concern over extremism. Why would that matter? If a party is considered extreme then they won't win elections will they?

Exactly no point in joining CND if the leadership wants to keep nukes.

Because we have had a 2 party system for centuries the leadership tell the party members this is what you should believe in rather than listening to what the membership wants.

I'm starting think that Labour splitting up would be a good idea for democracy. We can have a Blairite European socialist style party and Corbyn an Angela et al can go back to the SWP.

They wont though because they know that a full on naked far left party will never get anywhere near power as the voters reject extremism at every election. That is why they have infiltrated the Labour party.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jeeagles Flag 28 Sep 21 1.44pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Isn't the point of joining a political party that you want a particular style of politics?

If there is a 'centrist majority' then why don't they create a centrist party and this giant majority can vote for them.

Let Labour or indeed every party be the party that its rank and file paying supporters want it to be....not rich lobbyists and elites.

As for your concern over extremism. Why would that matter? If a party is considered extreme then they won't win elections will they?

There's been a centrist majority since at least 1997.

That's why the "culture war" or "division in the Labour Party are a myth. Just a few disserdents with prehistoric ideas throwing trying to create a victim culture.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 1.54pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

There's been a centrist majority since at least 1997.

That's why the "culture war" or "division in the Labour Party are a myth. Just a few disserdents with prehistoric ideas throwing trying to create a victim culture.

The party rules allowed the party members the say, if it were just a few dissentients then they couldn't have got Corbyn elected over several 'Blairist' alternatives.

If there were a centrist majority in the Labour party that wouldn't have happened.

Now the party have changed it back and taken the deciding power away from the rank and file.....that's not 'centralist', that's elitist.

For me I don't care what the party actually is....I have no axe to grind on that....I just think that the membership should have the leader they believe in....not lobbyists or rich elites.

Then let the wider public choose, left, centre, right or whatever.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 2.00pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

Exactly no point in joining CND if the leadership wants to keep nukes.

Because we have had a 2 party system for centuries the leadership tell the party members this is what you should believe in rather than listening to what the membership wants.

I'm starting think that Labour splitting up would be a good idea for democracy. We can have a Blairite European socialist style party and Corbyn an Angela et al can go back to the SWP.

They wont though because they know that a full on naked far left party will never get anywhere near power as the voters reject extremism at every election. That is why they have infiltrated the Labour party.

Agreed.

In truth most people aren't that political and just wander through life trying to get through it....that's no criticism of them it's just how it's always been.

So let them create a mainstream Labour party....Hell, call it New Labour or the Blair party and I'm sure they would be more popular.

But instead they have gone back to block votes and elites (with their lobbyist democracy) over the memberships.

Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Sep 2021 2.04pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jeeagles Flag 28 Sep 21 2.10pm

Originally posted by Badger11
Exactly no point in joining CND if the leadership wants to keep nukes.

Because we have had a 2 party system for centuries the leadership tell the party members this is what you should believe in rather than listening to what the membership wants.

I'm starting think that Labour splitting up would be a good idea for democracy. We can have a Blairite European socialist style party and Corbyn an Angela et al can go back to the SWP.

They wont though because they know that a full on naked far left party will never get anywhere near power as the voters reject extremism at every election. That is why they have infiltrated the Labour party.

It's another disingenuous response from Stirlingsays, where he's most likely to purposely misinterpreted the post rather than not reading what I said. The majority of the electorate are either centre right or centre left and support one or two major parties. The majority of party membership is made up of the nutters.

Some are too extreme to even fit in with the nutters. They then tend to support the really mental parties, BNP, PA, Sargil's Old Labour, Respect etc.

They tend to all follow an agenda stating the main parties don't represent the electorate.

I agree that a UKIP for Labour Party would be a good way of dissasociating themselves with the weirdos.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 2.17pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

It's another disingenuous response from Stirlingsays, where he's most likely to purposely misinterpreted the post rather than not reading what I said. The majority of the electorate are either centre right or centre left and support one or two major parties. The majority of party membership is made up of the nutters.

Some are too extreme to even fit in with the nutters. They then tend to support the really mental parties, BNP, PA, Sargil's Old Labour, Respect etc.

They tend to all follow an agenda stating the main parties don't represent the electorate.

I agree that a UKIP for Labour Party would be a good way of dissasociating themselves with the weirdos.


Really I'm disingenuous am I?

I wrote directly at you addressing this very point.

'As for your concern over extremism. Why would that matter? If a party is considered extreme then they won't win elections will they?'

Yet I'm disingenuous?

My points mainly concern how democracy should work within parties and avoiding elitist and block control.

Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Sep 2021 2.21pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 28 Sep 21 2.57pm Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11


Because we have had a 2 party system for centuries the leadership tell the party members this is what you should believe in rather than listening to what the membership wants.


Exactly that, they're not in the least bit representative, because if you're a person/group/corporation of actual influence you simply need to make inroads on two fronts instead of one to get your way, while the best Joe Blow gets is a relative illusion of choice that comes to nothing.

People are fine with the Punch and Judy aspects of politics and indeed play right into the jeering and cheering, but they don't ever quite realise that they too are part of the performance. A system that encourages a meaningful degree of compromise (possibly via proportional representation), and is representative of voters concerns and interests would be a better way forward but good luck ever getting that.

Sure it's an approach that gets criticism too, but it's nuanced enough to be more in the hands of the people rather than corporations. Right now we really have just stumbled into a type of leadership where they only ever look out for their mates and the elderly (as the one voting block they want on side).

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 28 Sep 21 3.56pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Proportional representation is definitely more representative and a fairer reflection of actual votes.

That said all the practical criticisms of it still stand, parties are broad churches as they are and pull in different directions anyway, but they are far more cohesive than government by proportional representation....which rarely agrees enough to get anything done.

We could have more parties that reflect their voting base more accurately and then give them equal publicity so that their ideas reach the population equally.....even though the corporate media will obviously have favourites.

I had some sympathy with Labour over how Corbyn was treated by the media (though Corbyn is fine with that being done to his opponents). The political access to the public shouldn't be controlled by corporations and restricted by social media companies.

Those that care about democracy should have never allowed the situation as now to have developed.....but in reality it's a careerist gravy train for most of them.

Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Sep 2021 4.02pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 8 of 10 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Thank you Angela Rayner