DEM not gonna CON dis NATION: Rolling UK politics in the short-lived post-Murdoch era

By encouraging (especially young) non-voters to at least register their dissent, it is doing two things: Making them get off their arses and going to the polling booths, and by extension motivating them to take their first step towards becoming politically active

This seems like a fair point, to me.

also sending a message that people are dissatisfied with the way things are as opposed to very much indifferent

This less so - if the message is "we are dissatisfied but we are dissatisfied in all our different individual ways", that doesn't give anyone a clue about where to go. Anger is an energy and all that but there needs ot be more than "none of you are good enough". I think the political class are painfully aware of dissatisfaction, I don't think they know what to do about it.

ah, they're incompetent rather than uninterested

By encouraging (especially young) non-voters to at least register their dissent, it is doing two things: Making them get off their arses and going to the polling booths, and by extension motivating them to take their first step towards becoming politically active

getting them up off their arses to vote would be a much more useful power to wield, don't you think? if you've magically inspired them that far, like?

xpost
They're likely both, but I reckon a politician would be very pleased to work out a way of tapping into / mobilising a mass of disenchanted / disengaged current non-voters.

the main political parties and their patrons do what they want thanks largely to dissatisfaction and its anomic futile expression

just at the level of pure content, it would be interesting to see what nick clegg or his successor would say if exit polls showed that more 18-25 year olds deliberately spoilt their ballots than voted for the liberal democrats, which isn't entirely unfeasible if this become a social media thing, perchance even a bantz thing

getting them up off their arses to vote would be a much more useful power to wield, don't you think? if you've magically inspired them that far, like?

― midwife christless (darraghmac), Friday, November 8, 2013 4:29 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm dismayed that so many under 25y/os don't vote. There are loads of excuses: "They're all the same", "I don't like any of the parties", "I don't understand politics enough to vote", "Russell Brand told me not to vote", "I can't be fucked" etc. You can't do much about the "can't be fucked" contingent, granted, but the rest have no excuse. Even if they don't feel they ought to vote for a party, they should be encouraged to register that fact IMO.

and i can see social media being the catalysing factor for that - it's why some friends and i started a facebook page to encourage people to do it after the Brand debacle. at the moment it's mostly only people from our local area, but considering we've had nothing but that cockwipe Peter Lilley representing us for years (largely due to our constituency being shared with Harpenden, which is a good bus ride away as well as a bunch of villages and farmland), i can only hope it at least encourages a few more people to go and use their vote.

FWIW, even though we're actively encouraging vote spoiling, we also advocate voting for your chosen candidate over staying at home.

It's not an excuse. It's a belief. Under-25s see Boring Politics steal their future away from them and perceive that whoever they vote for, if they vote, are going to fuck them over if they get into power.

The old games won't work anymore and society needs to find a new way to live and function because people know that the Government - ANY Government - isn't going to do anything for them.

facht

It's not an excuse. It's a belief. Under-25s see Boring Politics steal their future away from them and perceive that whoever they vote for, if they vote, are going to fuck them over if they get into power.

The old games won't work anymore and society needs to find a new way to live and function because people know that the Government - ANY Government - isn't going to do anything for them.

― Here he is with the classic "Poème Électronique." Good track (Marcello Carlin), Friday, November 8, 2013 4:45 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think whether it's an excuse or a belief is down to the individual. A lot of people hadn't even considered the notion of a corrupt/moribund political system until a famous comedian went on Paxman and started spouting off about. The real trouble was, he told them that doing NOTHING about it was the solution. Great, because that's what they were doing all along.

What is your desired result, DL? Let's say that somehow 10% of the electorate could be persuaded to spoil their papers by writing 'none of the above' on them. What next?

harpenden is seized, all kulaks deported to radlett for internment and forcible re-education

the govt of the day cede power to the organisers of the fb group responsible

To be very honest, we're not sure of a desired result or outcome. I'm not even sure we're necessarily interested in one either. As I say, it's less about overnight miracles and more about incremental changes in attitude as well as standing up and being counted.
What I want is for people who currently aren't voting to at least become actively participant in the political and democratic process, whether that means voting for the first time or showing that one is actively opposed to it. A lot of people don't realise that ballot spoiling is an option, so a lot of it is about raising awareness, activating people, getting them to think about how their lives are being affected by politics in the hope it becomes a lifelong habit. It's also about raising awareness when it comes to dissent. I think there are a lot of people out there who are disgusted with the current parties and the political status quo, but there's no way of measuring that if people stay at home. In the unlikely situation that every disenchanted person went out and registered their ballot as spoilt, it would be a first step towards doing something about it.

A lot of people hadn't even considered the notion of a corrupt/moribund political system until a famous comedian went on Paxman and started spouting off about.

Now I am depressed

To Tom D.: Are you surprised though? Not everyone, especially not younger people, are interested in the news. They hear the words 'politics' or 'current affairs' and immediately change channel. It's men in suits talking waffle for the most part and what has that got to do with the average 18 year old? Young people didn't vote in the last election because they were against the political system, they didn't vote because for the most part they weren't interested or didn't even know why they should. From what I remember, democracy was never explained to us in school. We weren't taught the difference between the various political beliefs or how parliament is organised or what first past the post means or even what happens when we vote. I had to learn all this for myself and really didn't feel like I had a grasp on such facts till i was past 25.
I wouldn't be surprised if there is good reason for this. If kids were taught about the very basics of our political infrastructure we would have a very different political climate on our hands.

I am surprised that so many people would take notice of what Russell Brand might be saying tbh.

Not everyone, especially not younger people, are interested in the news. They hear the words 'politics' or 'current affairs' and immediately change channel. It's men in suits talking waffle for the most part and what has that got to do with the average 18 year old?

It's always been like that though, hasn't it?

Excuse me if I'm misunderstood this Things Are Worse Than They Used to Be

That's neither nor there. Like him or not, Brand casts a popular (and controversial) figure. He's got more direct influence in what comes out of his mouth than any of the politicians. What he says gets discussed, not only by people who take an active interest in the news. He's the first major pop-culture figure in a long time to express, explicitly, on mainstream media, views that would otherwise be considered extremely radical. And it's not as if they're that radical. Sure he uses the term 'revolution' and talks about not voting, but ultimately he's preaching equality - something that shouldn't be derided or sneered at. The fact there's been such a reaction in the media and social media is a sign of that influence. It's making people who might never have questioned the validity of those running the country sit up and listen and discuss. Social media is a great booster in all of this - something we didn't used to have. Now you can thrash out ideas over Facebook or Twitter, ask questions, argue, form beliefs, break them. The important thing is that people are getting involved in the debate, which I think is brilliant.

I think whether it's an excuse or a belief is down to the individual. A lot of people hadn't even considered the notion of a corrupt/moribund political system until a famous comedian went on Paxman and started spouting off about. The real trouble was, he told them that doing NOTHING about it was the solution. Great, because that's what they were doing all along.

Sorry but that's just ill-informed bullshit. What the hell do you think Occupy - to cite just one example - has been doing over the last couple of years? As if anyone who was being fucked over by the Government just decided to roll over in bed? Maybe RB was the active catalyst that gets something moving and there's nothing wrong with being that. And RB didn't say do NOTHING; watch the interview again - he does give an alternative which sounds to me suspiciously like our old friend Communism but as he says he's just been editing a political magazine and can't come up with solutions overnight. But he's absolutely right to say that "the very basis of our political infrastructure," from root upwards, is dead and spent, history, and that we need to think of something else, and quickly.

Occupy was very easy to ignore if you lived outside of a major city and weren't already somehow politically motivated or invested in some way. A lot of people, including those who agreed more or less with their values, saw the Occupy movement as a nuisance. Organised protest works on some levels, but arguably it doesn't have the same reach as Brand did appearing on national tv(and then on Facebook and Twitter) saying some very non-mainstream things (many of which I can relate to and agree with btw - I'm not arguing that fact). I'm not saying Brand said nothing, but he did encourage boycotting polling stations, and I don't agree that that's a viable way to express dissent. Hence spoiling ballots as a more active alternative.

The reason the Tories get in so often is because they rely on the people of suburban towns to vote for them. They haven't a hope in a lot of large cities. I live in a suburban town. Most of the people I know are left wing or liberal so it confounds me that we've been a strong Tory area for so long, and I do put it down to apathy at the polling stations on behalf of people who don't feel motivated to vote on polling day.

This just makes me feel fucking hopeless though:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy

Yes but it's George Monbiot. This is Kenneth Clarke's reply: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/11/eu-us-trade-deal-transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership-democracy

Trouble is that "most of the people I know" is usually the minority of whatever community they're part of. Boris got voted in by the suburbs, so did Rob Ford in Toronto. Solution surely to confine city elections to inhabitants of actual cities?

A lot of people, including those who agreed more or less with their values, saw the Occupy movement as a nuisance.

This is Tory/Ukip thinking: "oh, some of my best friends are liberals, I just don't want to live next door to them."

FFS, protest is supposed to be a nuisance, that's how it works. A protest that gets in the way of no one achieves nothing.

a protest that gets in the way of everyone, or all of the wrong people, is more likely to be counter-productive

sorry- ffs, a protest that gets in the way of etc etc

Occupy should be like Eric Sykes and Hattie Jacques, waving little placards outside the Co-op saying "PRICES DOWN!"

it's a hearts and minds thing - sometimes you want to be disruptive, sometimes you want to broaden the scope of your appeal, i don't think activists are always brilliant at making the best tactical decisions

i don't think it's being a capitalist running dog to suggest that any action needs to be subordinated to the long term aims of yr movement

Not sure a few tents outside St Paul's Cathedral really disrupted anyone tbh but it got a lot more press attention than about 10yrs worth of May Day protests.

fair point- it did disrupt a fair bit of proper news coverage

Could have done without the didgeridoos and bongos though

PHEAR IDS TEH DRAGON SLAYER: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10436998/Ed-Miliband-has-no-answer-to-IDS-the-dragon-slayer.html

Bloody Hell at the first line of that article.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, has a slightly oriental appearance, which is appropriate.

It's actually more genetic than appropriate apparently.

Abetted by broken families and day-time television, the welfare state has created a problem that goes well beyond unemployment.

Bruce Anderson is insane of course

IDS more like Jack the Giant Killer who basically made up all his exploits iirc

ah, Brute Anderson, never change

It's actually more genetic than appropriate apparently.

Yes, I think I remember the fact that he had a Japanese grandparent being wheeled out as evidence that the Tories' immigration policy couldn't possibly be racist at some point during his leadership.

mustn't...do...General Tojo joke

during his leadership.

Always worth remembering that this numpty was once leader of the Conservative Party

"Never underestimate the determination of a numpty"

Bruce Anderson? I thought that cunt was discredited years ago.

A devout Christian

When was the last time the UK cabinet has two former party leaders in it? Is it unprecedented?
(I guess there are four current or former party leaders in the cabinet if you include Clegg).

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/08/jobcentres-benefits-sanctions-targets

I know Douglas-Hume was foreign secretary under Heath, but I can't think of many more.