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

I actually agree with Frederik that blanket condemnation of UKIP voters isn't particularly helpful. The poisonous fantasy world many appear to inhabit isn't entirely of their own creation. If you have every mainstream political party and almost every news outlet presenting immigration, 'multiculturalism', etc as a negative, and positioning the UK's role with the EU as a combative one, you can't really be surprised when a portion of the electorate votes for the party with the strongest views on all. You would need to be fairly credulous to believe that Romanian Muslims are Halal-butchering our swans so they an serve them to unsuspecting white children in their Marxist-lesbian-run madrassas, stealing British jobs, purses and council houses as they go, but it would only require you to believe 30% of what you've red in the Daily Express / Mail.

There are two approaches you can take to that - engaging critically in the understanding that you are essentially dealing with people who have been lied to or accepting their concerns as a legitimate expression of white working class angst. Harris does the latter almost without exception. The idea of writing them off as irredeemable fascist scum doesn't appeal though.

I'm not gonna be horrible to the voters, because it's fairly easy to unthinkingly blame an Other group for everyone's conditions, but I feel VERY comfortable with pointing vitriol at the arseholes (right-wingers on the British version of 'wingnut welfare') manipulating them through rhetoric.

Absolutely. They're the enemy.

Please be patient with me; I find discussing politics, in IRL but especially on the internet quite stressful and even upsetting. I don't believe that Aldo is arguing with me in good faith; I believe that he wants to find "A Green" to shout at, and because I was foolish enough to post information he could easily google, I fulfilled that role.

Disclosure: I am a Green party member. Not very active, my main exposure to them came through local issues. They were people I got to know through the local festivals, library, community garden, etc. Because I know them socially, I'm aware of ~what kind of people~ they are, what their interests and concerns are. They tend to be compassionate hippies, yes, but they also tend to be very "evidence-based" compassionate hippies. e.g. What can we do to decrease emissions and road traffic? Oh, here's a study on bicycling from the Netherlands. What can we do about this awful intersection where pedestrians keep getting killed? Oh, here's a study on the effectiveness of traffic calming measures from Nottingham. What can we do about reoffenders from Brixton prison? Oh, there's a guy from the Quakers who's been running a study on that for 20 years, let's get him in to present his evidence. When people like *this*, the people actually running the campaigns on the ground, say things like "best clinical evidence" I believe that they actually *mean* policy should be dictated by clinical trials, in which complementary medicine performs badly, not "let woo-monkeys regulate the woo".

With regards to Brian Cox and his opinions, opinions do not exist in a vacuum. Cox was, at that point, a member of, and actively campaigning for the Lib Dems. Since the Lib Dems have always seen the Greens as a competitor for the "left wing protest vote" it is not surprising that he had a compelling motivation to see the evidence he wanted to see, and paint the Greens as ~loony-left woo-monkeys~. Green votes are indeed a threat to Lib Dems. I live in Lambeth; there used to be a significant LD presence on the local council. The Lib Dems ran a "smear the Greens" campaign locally, full of (deliberate?) misinformation, the Greens ran a "here are some figures" campaign. The LDs have been wiped from the map in Lambeth, the Greens have made gains.

I have not read the entire manifesto; instead I read the book that all members are issued with when considering joining, and some of the other suggested reading. So, no, I cannot argue chapter and verse about the manifesto, however, the book concentrated more on *why* and how Green party policy is formed. (e.g. finding an alternative to VAT goes along with their whole philosophy on eradicating Income Inequality; VAT disproportionately affects lower income households.) ITT, we have talked about "are there left wing objections to the EU that aren't based on racism and destroying labour laws/human rights?" and Green ideas on that seem more aligned with the ideas discussed there, on the "replace the capitalism-driven EU with a socialist paradise" front. Maybe it is more "utopian pipe dream" workable solution. But the lack of ideas coming from centre-Left parties headed increasingly rightward on issues I do know and care about, makes me have admiration for utopian pipe dreams and the people prepared to explore them. Maybe "renationalise the railroads and utilities" is also a pipedream, but they're the only ones I see advancing those arguments.

Objections to "Big Pharma" happening on both sides of the political spectrum. Again, this is an issue where there are two distinct strands which need to be untangled. The right wing thread of "I object to Science and Progress because it frightens me and undermines authority" is clearly bullshit. But "I am frightened by the increasing influence of capital and profit-driven decision making in medicine; medical decisions should be made by doctors, not shareholders" is less easy to handwave away as "woo", especially when it's coming not from idiots like Jenny McCarthy, but from scientists and doctors like Ben Goldacre and David Nutt. If you have already painted Greens as ~loony-left woo-monkeys~ you will see their opposition to Big Pharma as the former. If you see Greens as disillusioned former Labour voters attracted by "single-issue" buzzwords like "addressing income inequality" and "sustainability" then you may start to see it as the latter.

I am not an expert. I do not wish to become anyone's punching bag for "The Greens". These are just my opinions, and my experiences. Your opinions and experiences may differ substantially. I'm sorry this is so long. I probably should not have addressed any of these issues at all, but it's hard to stand silent when you see things you believe in, or things your associates are working for being twisted and misrepresented. I'm not really prepared to discuss much of this any further, mostly because I'm off to the Community Garden to weed organic bean-patches with my ~loony left~ mates for the rest of the afternoon. Discussing politics is difficult for me. When making local poltical decisions, I tend to trust the people with their knees in the dirt (literally and metaphorically) on a local level, more than I trust random people shouting at me on the internet.

Thanks, that's interesting.

I guess what I want to know was whether the u-turn from homeopathy was genuine, that's pretty much it. I would imagine they'd find it increasingly difficult to hang on to anti-science medicine stuff while, as you say, trying to promote evidence-based solutions for other issues.
I didn't come to the same conclusions as Aldo but I would find it heartening if they made a clear-cut statement on it. However, I imagine that could be a bit of a nightmare with trying to keep the traditional 'hippy dippy' voters so I don't really blame them if they don't.

I really, really, really despise all campaign material from all parties. It makes me despair. Greens have been relatively OK on that front so far ime.

xp what possible reason could you have for thinking Aldo is posting in "bad faith"? Is it because he disagrees with Green party policy, or with you? Because that's all I've seen him do ITT, and he's certainly not "shouting" at anyone.

I am perfectly able to draw my own conclusions about conversations I'm involved in, and do not need to be patronised by having them explained to me, thank you very much.

Aldo otm.

Starting with the proviso that the Greens seem like good people and less craven than the other parties, I read the actual Europe section of the manifesto, as opposed to what Aldo said it said, and its main problem is its setting of extremely ambitious targets coupled with a frustrating lack of detail about how they intend to get to that point*. The climate change policy has the same issue, there's a lot of 'set restrictions and let the market deal with how to achieve them' which strikes me as unworkable. The science and technology policy that would be absolutely central to bringing even a fraction of this about is remarkably flimsy and doesn't appear to have been revised since the beginning of 2011.

*Even established parties do this, but when the Tories do so they aren't going against the grain of how our international institutions are structured, so if anything it's easier to put bits of them into practice even when the whole aim is batshit and unworkable.

I love this faith in manifestos..

Thanks for all that. I am definitely not looking for a Green to bash, I guess my perspective is that I looked at the ballot paper on Thursday and found it to be chock full of arseholes but still couldn't bring myself to vote Green so I started asking myself why. I have no doubt the current Bristol scandal, which has been all over my FB feed now I don't live in Bristol any more, showing one of their senior councillor's to be just another nose-in-the-trough careerist politician might have coloured my judgement. (And yes, it's one individual, but you could make that same argument over pretty much any political scandal and yet it still gets attributed to parties in general.)

But ultimately it's their policy on healthcare I believe which stopped me. Alternative medicine has conclusive failed every clinical trial that it's been subjected to. The only way it could pass in future is for the trials to be changed. And that's fundamentally unscientific, changing the burden of proof to suit the subject. "Best clincal evidence" has already shown there was no place for them in the NHS. As I said before, Jeremy Hunt was roundly castigated as unfit to be Health Secretary because of his personal belief in homeopathy, so does that mean there could never be a Green Health secretary taken seriously?

To touch on Bananaman's point, there is absolutely a case to be made for reform of these organisations - but the Greens have them as one of their short term goals in the policy paper, the sort of things that would normally be the easy targets in a manifesto. And it's from those policies that the rest of their economic policies fall out - with the pseudo-feudal system in place and no EU control over trade, there will be little or no need to move things between geographic areas so transportation is massively cut meaning the traffic problems are solved. Because there is no WTO all areas across the world will see their standard of living rise, which means they won't want to emigrate, solving migration. Because they all have the same standard of living they won't be jealous of each other, so there won't be any wars therefore we don't need a defence budget.

And that's where my other problem is I suppose. It all hangs together under a unified philosophy, but there is far too much under the gift of the rest of the world to agree that it's simply not credible as a political manifesto. Much of it is admirable - on health, for example, there is a focus on attacking the cause of disease and not just treating the symptoms that would make John Snow proud, and investigating societal causes for poor health (presumably expanding the concept of the Glasgow Effect) is undoubtedly worthwhile but it's undone by the weak language elsewhere on the topic.

It's lovely to see an actual left wing party win votes, but it'd be even nicer to see one that could be taken credibly as a political force. I fear, however, they're doomed to be the left wing UKIP, a protest vote to try and make Labour buck up their ideas before you vote for them in the election (an interesting piece on radio 4 on Friday interviewed a voter who said just that re: UKIP/Tories; that he would never in a month of Sundays vote for UKIP in a general election, but had in these to make a point). I'd love to be proved wrong but I believe that needs less of a reliance on broad philosophy and more workable policies.

I've got no interest in having a go at individuals for their political beliefs, mainly because I don't think any of ours stand up to rigid scrutiny completely, so apologies to Branwell if she thought I was having a go at her.

xxxp I wasn't trying to "explain" anything to you, just pointing out that it's a remarkably uncharitable interpretation of Aldo's posts. Anyway peace seems to have broken so I'll shut up.

Is there anything more to the Bristol 'scandal' than one of their councilors saying (in passing to a friend) that he thought his salary was "low" and buying an ex-council property?

^ was wondering same

Also, while we're here, re: Miliband: what kind of tosser makes a photocall out of offering a Jewish* guy a BACON SANDWICH?

*Seriously, unless the Jewish guy at the photocall is Jay PORK PORK PORK Rayner, NAGL.

Buying an ex-council property contrary to party policy, having been advised beforehand that it was coming up for sale. "I never saw that email." Making comments on social medi about how couldn't afford a flight to NYC (having since clarified he would be staying with the friend) while earning roughly double the minimum wage.

Personally I don't think either of them are that big a deal but both of them would be cause célèbre criticisms if they happened to one of the big parties - Geoff Hoon "didn't see that email" and was sacked, having been ridiculed as a minister not in control of the department. Michael Fabricant was sacked (he claims) for his twitter comments on Maria Miller leaving. So I guess I just want the same standards to be applied across the board.

Also part of the Bristol ire is that he's seen as the lapdog to Bristol's Eco-fascist (and I use the word fascist advisedly) Mayor George Ferguson and always votes with him even if he's the only one (such as the expansion of residents parking schemes, voted down 20-2 but still going ahead because the mayor and assistant mayor are in favour).

Not seen a single thing abt it in my Bristol-based FB tbf
Seems like a problem with one individual rather than party-wide problem

Greens made two gains in Bristol

(and one UKIP :( )

Entirely possible it's one individual, on the other hand the party has done nothing about the individual (which is the standard we'd expect elsewhere).

Thanks for the explanation, Aldo, I do appreciate it, and I do understand where you're coming from a lot better now. Sorry for doubting your intentions; ILX has made me over cautious.

When it comes down to choosing who to vote for, things like "used to be soft on homeopathy" is a little lower on my list of priorities than things like, y'know, promised the moon and just ended up propping up the Tories. Or, come to think of it "invaded 2 countries illegally without UN support" is quite far up there, too! And although I cannot show anyone the bit on the Green manifesto that directly says "homeopathy is actually bunkum, sorry about that" - until someone can show me the bit on the Labour manifesto that directly says "won't invade any more countries!" they're not getting my vote again.

I don't know that Greens are ever going to have any national power. But I do believe that they are capable of doing good work locally. Already our Labour MP (Chuka Umunna, I think he is one of the good 'uns) has been tweeting about working with our new Green councillor. I know Scott, I know he has a ton of great ideas and he's the kind of guy that will make them happen. I think that the good we can hope to accomplish is on the local level, as well as in terms of grass roots Greens tugging Labour leftward.

obviously as/if they grow, the greens will lose the promising glow of a party uncorrupted by power, & at the same time probably learn to get better at dealing w/ emerging scandals &c. I'm not sure how I feel about the somewhat conservative/static utopia they are gesturing towards, but for now at least, they seem like a worthwhile developing project & the best repository for the sort of broadly left-wing idealism I'm interested in

Also part of the Bristol ire is that he's seen as the lapdog to Bristol's Eco-fascist (and I use the word fascist advisedly) Mayor George Ferguson and always votes with him even if he's the only one (such as the expansion of residents parking schemes, voted down 20-2 but still going ahead because the mayor and assistant mayor are in favour).

i work in bristol.
and this hits home.
the stories i have heard in the office re the complete refusal to listen to local residents re his introductions of the parking schemes beggars belief.

The picture given seems to be that there was a lot of resistance to the current RPZs and now residents are all 'actually they're pretty good' (no idea if that's actually accurate, seems better where I am but that's not to say it should be a blanket move) so I guess they're taking that and running with it. Can't believe they can actually do that, though

He actually appeared on tv saying democracy had no part to play I his plans to make Bristol car-free. (C4 9pm documentary piece on Bristol's traffic chaos, can't remember the title. Although that reached new heights last week where a man got a ticket for getting out of his car to read the parking sign.)

This one?

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-cctv-traffic-wardens-caught-on-camera/episode-guide

Thought that was a one-off. The one I watched showed mainly cretinous drivers iirc. Would like to discuss Smooth Move Ferguson but not sure this is the thread...

That's the one. I agree there were some poor drivers in it, but the sheer volume of tickets issued in the short stretch I used to live just off was utterly ridiculous.

UKIP think they're on course to get the largest share of the vote in the Euro election - have topped poll in Hull, Doncaster and a bunch of other Labour-aligned places as well as Conservative strongholds. Tories are talking about an in / out Euro referendum in 2017.

UKIP got 5x more votes than Lib Dems in Yorkshire, 6x as many in East Midlands. They've absolutely collapsed.

Behind Greens in both, too.

is this quote legit?

Asked whether the people had rejected his party’s racist policies, [Nick Griffin] said: “They’ve voted for Ukip’s racist policies instead.”

According to The Guardian, yep.

burn

nick griffin doesn't need to say anything else, ever. can that be his epitaph please

Europeans Party 595 0.00 (0.00) 0 0

in seara asta, prietenii mei, suntem cu toții Bosko Balaban

LibDems appear to be about to descend into open warfare. It occurred to me the other day that Miliband could conceivably be the only main party leader to go into the next election. The knives seem to be out for Clegg, and if Scotland votes Yes then it will look like an enormous blunder on Cameron's part, and the anger from the press and from his own benches will be so intense that I can't see him surviving.

Scotland won't vote Yes.

Selfishly I hope they won't because its buh-bye anything other than a Tory victory in the UK for the foreseeable, right?

Not necessarily

UKIP got 5x more votes than Lib Dems in Yorkshire, 6x as many in East Midlands. They've absolutely collapsed.

What's actually happening here though - and in other Labour voting areas? I doubt the Lib Dem vote has gone over en masse to UKIP, I suspect what's happened is that it's gone (more or less) en masse to Labour and that, in turn, the Labour Party has somehow managed to lose a shitload of its core vote to UKIP, doh!

Alternatively, a lot of Lib Dem voters didn't bother showing up, i guess. I suspect that Labour would have lost a fair amount to UKIP, though.

A lot of people just didn't vote. I would guess that the vast majority of the UKIP-inclined took the opportunity to vote on Thursday (if they aren't going to vote then, when would they?), but turnout will be 20 percentage points higher in the general election and UKIP won't be picking up any more votes (if anything they'll probably lose some protest voters back to the Tories).

haven't poked around into the yougov figures quoted here, but they reckon 15% of Ukip voters were 2010 Lab, 14% 2010 Lib.

This was worth a read the other day: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/local-election-results-2014-aav.html
(seems to have been written before the Euro results came out)

this is a perspective http://ramblingsofapr.com/2014/05/26/farage-victory-mirage-ukip-2014/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/2014/newsspec_7595/content/english/img/map_ukip.gif

reckon london should peel off and join scotland

Like West Berlin? Would the Scots have to airlift vital supplies to us?

*Scans perimeter wall for parcels from the Tunnocks factory*

If you could get me some tablet and some square sausage I would be well pleased.