How can I undermine the Tories?

Post Reply New Topic

The NHS has a serious problem no matter how you cut it, whoever is in power will have to deal with it.

Either NI will have to go up for some. Or there will need to be some supplement based on use, like in Europe.

Nothing you can every do or say will ever change them.

'Resistance is futile'

And... now they want to axe the Freedom of Information Act. They're turning into the Nazis by the day, it seems. How can this be ignored? If even their own voters think they won't be affected by any of this... at this rate I'd literally not be surprised if they tried to rationalize the building of concentration camps within their five years. With a tiny majority suddenly they think they can transform the UK into some totalitarian state where hypocrisy and nepotism reigns supreme.

Labour have a 200 seat advantage on the Lib Dems, that's twice the gap between them and the Tories.

Even if there was a 50-seat swing from Labour to the Lib Dems in England and Wales (restoring the Lib Dems to their peak size) and the Lib Dems completely swept Scotland, both of which seem extremely unlikely to me, Labour would still be the biggest party of opposition.

Labour's leadership election is getting much more attention than the Lib Dem one did so I think it's safe to say the Labour leader is seen as more likely to become PM.

Think it will be 2025 before the Lib Dems (assuming they even still exist) can make a challenge for 2nd party. UKIP would need major reform to win over the 80% of the country that detests 80% of the party, put Carswell in charge and they could maybe be a right-wing alternative to the Lib Dems.

What I was really disappointed about is that UKIP didn't seem to steal votes off the Tories. Why on Earth would former Labour voters think they'd act any better? People are ret*d...

Also, Walrus, what's wrong with Corbyn? He seems like not a hypocrite at least, and seems to be truly to the left. What is wrong with the left, really?

In many ways I prefer the sort of things Corbyn stands for to those embodied in the other candidates. One of his real problems is that he has very little support among Labour MPs, as opposed to within the Party more widely - he only got enough nominations because some members, who are opposed to what he stands for, endorsed his candidature 'to widen the debate' within the party. A ruthless purge seems to have taken place in the Blair years, with only people who supported 'New Labour' pro-market policies selected as candidates. How on earth he could command the loyalty of such people in the Commons, or even form a government if elected Party Leader and subsequently Prime Minister, heaven knows. I doubt that anywhere near even 10% of current Labour MPs are Socialists in any meaningful sense, or even understand the term properly.

Corbyn will also be over 70 years old at the next General Election. Will he have the energy for a gruelling election campaign, and the mental and physical resources to handle the stresses and responsibilities of leading the country? We have got used to electing young, fresh-faced leaders over the last couple of decades, like Blair and Cameron. Can you imagine the battering Corbyn would get from the media on account of his age, not to mention his policies? It might be worth your while, Mootoo, to do a bit of research on Michael Foot, 1981-83, and Menzies Campbell, 2006-2007.

Well... like electing young leaders does any good. Cameron is turning out to be a plain fascist.

I don't think the 'Fascist' tag in reference to the Cameron government is very helpful here. I can't see the Tories scrapping General Elections, murdering or imprisoning political opponents, arming their supporters or setting up a Secret Police.

Likewise it would have been difficult to imagine Hitler and Mussolini backing same-sex marriage, or 'playing by the rules' to such an extent that bringing projects like Hinckley Point, HS2, Fracking etc to fruition would prove difficult or impossible.

Theresa May won't even allow water cannons....!

How is Hinckley Point, HS2, Fracking... related to fascism? One might say it's a simple manifestation of their disregard for the environment. Green is the last thing they are. Their support for gay marriage is simply a gesture to today's sentiments. Many Tories already detest it.

And sure enough, they don't (so far) use violence themselves, but sociologically they're creating strife with their budget. They do it through politics, not necessarily physical. They've already screwing Labour and trying to practically become a one-party state by smashing unions.

Theresa May won't allow them just so she could block Johnson from getting to be the next leader. It's simple rotten politics.

My point about the Hinckley Point nuclear reactor, fracking etc, is that any Fascist government 'worthy' of the name would simply have enacted the legislation to bring them about, disregarding (or indeed liquidating) any opposition. Do you think the third Heathrow runway will ever be built as well?

I seriously don't think they really give a damn about runways... fascist governments in the past didn't, either. The point is sociological. Those aren't what they're concentrating on. They're only topics to bore people enough to not campaign on their other bills.

Oh, and, if they're not sociologically fascist why are they seemingly on a holy crusade to ban porn, supposedly to protect children? They've already tried to totally ban 'extreme' porn, which still involves consent. If that's not authoritarian fascism I don't know what is.

Also, with regards to elections... are you sure they're not doing it in an underhanded manner? An article I read online (http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/ ... igged.html is something else I just found) somewhere detailed how it restricted student voters, who are more likely to vote Labour, from registering as a single unit at university, already when they move so much (not to mention they've specifically enacted law against young people and students, supposedly due to their not voting for them). If that's not attempting to destroy the voting system, what is? They're trying to destroy Labour by destroying the unions. That is what fascist regimes do. Sure, it's great that they don't (yet) resort to violence, but it's corruption nonetheless.

(ps. everyone seemed to somehow forget that Osborne got involved in some act of solicitation (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/fina ... anker.html - murder too, by association) with some Russian oligarch back before 2010. And no one (besides a few MPs who pointed it out recently) seems to care that May failed epically as a home secretary, and yet somehow, due to sheer nepotism, she's allowed to continue on as the most shallow long-serving and dictatorial irrational curmudgeon.)

In discussing the alleged 'Fascist' nature of the present-day Tory Party, I think it makes sense to stick with political and constitutional definitions. Oh I know it's not anywhere near as simple as that, but when you move into questions of sociological fascism, psychological fascism or whatever, it gets a lot more nebulous and subjective.

On the porn issue, all I know is that hardcore porn was totally illegal in this country at the end of the 20th Century, yet it now seems to be freely available online, on dvd, and in magazines. I can't see that situation being reversed by this government, however much they might go through the motions of tinkering at the edges.

I took a look at the website you mentioned as well. One of the many things about it which struck me was the prevalent anti-Semitism - some of which wouldn't have been out of place under the Third Reich http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/ ... -joko.html.


Edit: Could you perhaps clarify your remarks on Theresa May and 'nepotism', which I don't follow? She doesn't seem to have significant connections within the Party through family or marriage, a far as I can discover.

When was the last time a left wing leader was elected?

The Prime Minister can only come from one of two parties. If Corbyn becomes the Labour leader, then the 2020 election will already have been decided, because too many voters are opposed to his policies. If your only goal is undermining the Tories, send in a Blairite Labour leader who actually has a chance of winning.

If nothing else, electing Kendall will probably see the Tories lose their majority and be forced to work with another party, which should temper their excesses.

There's a reason Tory supporters are joining the Labour party just to vote Corbyn.

I really don't know why we should put up with hypocritical Blair clones (Blair should be charged over Iraq, not listened to), when a modern leftist stance could summon a passionate enough majority to vote like in Greece. The right isn't the only side that's 'emerging', unfortunately both in extreme quantities at times, all over Europe.

DeepHour, I don't subscribe to anti-semitism (or anti anyone), but Israel is wrong on so many levels as to what it's doing to Gaza - it's only pure speculation by the commentators, but from what I remember Tories didn't generally oppose Israel in its modern oppression of Gaza citizens. Any other connections individual MPs have may be incidental, I haven't delved deep into it, but Israel should be tackled with a modern perspective IMO.

By nepotism I was simply referring to how (practically all the ministers) seem to be a close-knit group who, even if they haven't gone to Eton, are simply close friends to Cameron. And, if the recent appointment of Johnson isn't nepotism I don't know what is...