|
Post by alancalverd on Jun 13, 2019 23:27:36 GMT 1
Much media frenzy about the election of the leader of the Tory party, but I think it is overhyped.
First of all, this is not a presidential republic. The prime minister is just that - primus inter pares, and the chairman, not the dictator, of the Cabinet. Government policy is whatever they can get away with in Parliament, not what the PM wants (see the shenaingans of the last 3 years!).
But they are not necessarily electing a PM.
Suppose the Tories (or rather, 80,001 elderly southern gentlemen who are paid-up members of the Party) elect somebody who offends or refuses to bribe the DUP? The rule is that the Queen asks the person, not the party leader ex officio, who can command a majority in the Commons, to form a government. And that would be Comrade Corbyn. No requirement for a general election (which both the Tories and Labour would lose, but wouldn't give any other party a commanding position) or even an actual vote of confidence, just a quick bung to the DUP and a word in the ear of the SNP; chaos rules (there being no discernible policy other than xenophobia on the Opposition benches), Scotland secedes from the Union, and Brexit is shelved indefinitely.
We might have a civil war, if it stops raining and there's nothing on the telly. Or maybe I'll watch some cricket.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jun 14, 2019 13:00:08 GMT 1
Democracy, as we know it in the UK might well be flawed. However many other systems have been tried in other parts of the world and I think all of them eventually have failed.
I recall working for a large outfit at the height of the cold war. We had a delegation from the USSR visiting the factory to look at some kit we were making. And there were engineers of varying degrees, and in those days a political minder. A very good friend who was Polish was asked to tag along. He had been brought up close to the Russian border and spoke fluent Russian, as well as Polish and English. I watched him one afternoon involved in a furious row with the minder, red faced shouty stuff, and he came back to where we worked and calmed down a bit.
I asked him what it had been about. He told me that the minder had told him he was a traitor for leaving when he did and he should go back. My friend told him that if their communist system was that much better then the whole world would be communist within a week. It was not any better, and all they could say is, it was different. That has stuck with me for many years. There are many different systems, but better? I don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jun 15, 2019 16:43:41 GMT 1
Democracy is great, as long as you don't have an elected president. It is vital for the survival of civilisation that we don't allow prime ministers to behave like presidents. We never had gates across Downing Street before Thatcher.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jun 17, 2019 15:01:01 GMT 1
Democracy is great, as long as you don't have an elected president. It is vital for the survival of civilisation that we don't allow prime ministers to behave like presidents. We never had gates across Downing Street before Thatcher. Sadly a sign of the times Alan. Violent mobs encouraged by various politicians who should know better. Don't agree with one thing or another? Semi riot. I recall going on one of the early Aldermaston marches which is showing signs of my age. Peaceful, happy bunch of people with very little police presence. No damage, no violence. Once the radical mob got involved it was a lot different. I would not dream of going to any demonstration now no matter how much I might support the cause. Violence and criminal damage seems to be the norm. And was it not Abraham Lincoln who walked to his inauguration ceremony, then walked home alone reflecting on this thoughts? Not now, any president or prime minister needs an armoured car and armed escort.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jun 18, 2019 12:51:59 GMT 1
One of the advantages of a hereditary monarchy is that there is little need to protect the head of state. If some idiot assassinated the Queen, the next King and several more are already in line, with the succession undisputed until at least number 200. I recall a Buckingham Palace garden party about 15 years ago in the presence of HMQ, Phil and Chas, with Girl Guides collecting the tickets at the gate and just one police sniper visible on the roof. It seems that election makes enemies, succession makes friends.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jun 19, 2019 12:12:36 GMT 1
I agree. I had a similar experience a few years ago when Charles was present at an event I attended. He and a few others sat at a table not remote from anybody else, and people generally behaved themselves and did not swarm all over him taking pictures or selfies. Apart from a couple of police outside you would not have known. Maybe the 'security' was further back, who knows, but they did not stop Jethro managing to get him up on stage!
One wonders what sort of security our next PM will need. Quite a lot I think. I managed to avoid the 'debate' last night but am still puzzle as to why the BBC and other media outlets are all trumpeting Rory Stewart. Can't remember where he came on the first ballot, but almost last, and the same yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jun 21, 2019 16:42:05 GMT 1
Rory Stewart came across in several radio interviews as the only candidate who had held down a proper job ("something" in the Foreign Office - i.e. a spy), actually knew how government works at the sharp end, and answered every question - even the one he isn't allowed to answer.
Having upset nobody, he would have been the perfect candidate for the number 2 slot because Party members with an eye on future elections (as distinct from MPs arselicking for future Cabinet posts) would have seen that he alone had the "Corbyn magic" of actually appealing to the electorate, and unlike Corbyn, didn't bullshit and prevaricate as he did so.
Sadly, the Party faithful now have to choose between two piles of narcissistic shit, either of which will guarantee the demise of the Conservative and Unionist Party at the next general election. I'm not entirely sure this is a Good Thing: rather like the Church of England, the Tory Party is Wrong but Fairly Harmless compared with everything else currently on offer, and has historically held the Labour Party in office to a fairly moderate and consistent course. The thought of a coalition of DUP scum, SNP banshees and incoherent Momentum antisemites actually being in charge of anything is even more worrying than the vicar's daughter not being in charge.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jul 7, 2019 19:28:09 GMT 1
And whilst I'm on my high horse, doesn't it seem odd that our de facto dictator will be elected by 80,000 nameless members of a party that doesn't have a parliamentary majority? In a proper fascist or communist state, the entire populace get the chance to endorse the Chosen One or go to prison for dissent. We don't even have that option.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Jul 8, 2019 7:35:15 GMT 1
We nevr do - the PM is always appointed by just a few
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jul 12, 2019 13:48:20 GMT 1
Times have changed, however, and the status that will quo very shortly is possibly unprecedented.
As I understand it, the rule is, or was, that the Queen invites whoever is best able to command a majority in Parliament, to form a government, and the PM chairs, not commands, the executive.
Now, by common consent of the meeja, whoever is elected by whatever corrupt means by the members of whichever party last batted, becomes Diktator and Colonel in Chief of the armed forces. So it's up to Kim Jong Boris to send cannon fodder to Afghanistan, "repatriate" anyone with a black face, or whatever takes his fancy, as long as 80,000 Tories think he is more like them than the 79,999 who voted for the other bloke.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Sept 3, 2019 11:51:20 GMT 1
Looking at recent events of mobs (not very big mobs) all baying for blood on the streets, the Union flag being burned, people being spat at and called Nazis racists and all else besides, and the deliberate shutting down of parts of major cities largely fuelled by the far left egging them on from their comfortable ivory towers I am starting to wonder if democracy will survive.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 5, 2019 6:55:02 GMT 1
Looking at recent events of mobs (not very big mobs) all baying for blood on the streets, the Union flag being burned, people being spat at and called Nazis racists and all else besides, and the deliberate shutting down of parts of major cities largely fuelled by the far left egging them on from their comfortable ivory towers I am starting to wonder if democracy will survive. I think I must have missed all that, unless you're talking about Hong Kong, or Ferguson, or Paris, or Malmo, or perhaps Britain in the 70s. I'm rather pleasantly impressed with how resilient our system has turned out to be, and peacefully responsive to divisions in public opinion. No one's been hurt, because or despite it all - including Jo Cox, and the faux sensibilities of a few liberal-lefty women MPs mining her murder for political gain. Of course, the general point, if one were concerned about public dissatisfaction being stirred by the ineffectualities of an executive unable to take decisions when required, is that hung parliaments and coalitions and PR systems are very dangerous at best and merely promulgating of the status quo, and the powers that benefit from it, at its norm - which is at root the most important reason we should leave the EU. The solution, as ever - the absolute bedrock and mainsping of democratic accountability - is a General Election. The ability of the Opposition to prevent this is the only genuine threat to our democratic system that I can see, and it should never have been made possible - Cameron and Clegg should both hang their heads, for this disastrous mistake if for nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 5, 2019 6:59:21 GMT 1
Times have changed, however, and the status that will quo very shortly is possibly unprecedented. As I understand it, the rule is, or was, that the Queen invites whoever is best able to command a majority in Parliament, to form a government, and the PM chairs, not commands, the executive. Now, by common consent of the meeja, whoever is elected by whatever corrupt means by the members of whichever party last batted, becomes Diktator and Colonel in Chief of the armed forces. So it's up to Kim Jong Boris to send cannon fodder to Afghanistan, "repatriate" anyone with a black face, or whatever takes his fancy, as long as 80,000 Tories think he is more like them than the 79,999 who voted for the other bloke. The PM doesn't take such decisions = Parliament does. The solution if you, we, don't like it is as above.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 5, 2019 14:55:16 GMT 1
Not quite true - I'm also increasingly concerned by the unipolar concentration of the broadcast media in this country. Most people still get their news information this way, and the various forms of alternative online sources that young people are said to increasingly rely on don't really help with the problem, but rather exacerbate it (not many, I'm sure, follow my irksome self-corrective of seeking out contradictory sources.) The one comfort here is that despite the relentless propagandistic bias of their Brexit coverage, they don't seem to have shifted public opinion much - but, nevertheless, maybe by enough, and at who knows what longer-term deeper-lying damage. Or maybe people becoming more acutely aware of media manipulation is no damage at all - there are hopeful signs in the States, where the problem is more widespread and virulent, that as trust in the media, of all kinds, falls to its lowest ever level, actual political involvement has concurrently risen. It reminds me of John Carpenter's alien invasion parody, They Live, where subliminal signals are printed and broadcast everywhere - Watch TV, Stay Asleep, Obey.
Talking of which - this latest Trump witch-hunt is, even more than the others, clearly going to seriously backfire on the Democrats (and Biden particularly of course - he must be nightly screaming in his sleep.)
|
|