PES Manifesto for European Elections June 2009
- Thread starter PES Activist
- Start date
KingCondanomation
New member
Cool, I just remember Tony Blair being quizzed prior to his first term about his plans for nationalization and he said he doesn't have any except with water which he said something like it should belong to the people or it was too much to privatize it, but it looks like he abandoned his plans. Well that's a pleasant surprise I haven't had in awhile.
Read some more on it and it sound like it went very well, despite Blair still trying to attack them and imposing windfall profit taxes:
http://www.environmentprobe.org/enviroprobe/index.cfm?DSP=content&ContentID=16409
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
Tony Blair said something and you believed him?
You're going off the boil, Dano.
KingCondanomation
New member
Well it was in 1997 or thereabouts. I mean when he came into power then, there was lefties hooting in the streets about finally ousting the Tories after 18 years in power and having a great leader - so I was hardly the only one.
I am of the belief that it really didn't matter who was in power in the US or Britain after Sep 11, both our countries would have been in Iraq regardless. Impossible to prove but just basing that on the history and the close relationship of our nations.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Man, I'm so glad it's not the 90's anymore and the rights "get tough" postrusing no longer works. Because it truly makes me sick in my stomach every time you pretend it still does.
And the Conservative party is anti-gun. No party in Britian is pro-gun. There is no gun culture in the UK and any party that supported re-legalizing handguns would die a painful death.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Well it was in 1997 or thereabouts. I mean when he came into power then, there was lefties hooting in the streets about finally ousting the Tories after 18 years in power and having a great leader - so I was hardly the only one.
I am of the belief that it really didn't matter who was in power in the US or Britain after Sep 11, both our countries would have been in Iraq regardless. Impossible to prove but just basing that on the history and the close relationship of our nations.
Dano, your belief that Labour is a leftwing party after all these years truly demonstrates how delusional you've become and how much you've lost touch with reality.
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
Well it was in 1997 or thereabouts. I mean when he came into power then, there was lefties hooting in the streets about finally ousting the Tories after 18 years in power and having a great leader - so I was hardly the only one.
It wasn't just lefties on the streets. After 18 years almost everyone had had a belly-full of a tired washed up government. However, i was among those cheering. They have since killed any vestige of hope and allowed the cynics to seize my cold black heart.
I can agree with you on that. The Tories were even more gung-ho about the war than Tony. There were a few notable exceptions on both sides (Robin Cooks and Ken Clarkes, i'm looking at you) but the Lib Dems were the only ones to come out of it with any credit and spent the next 5 years telling everyone about it incessantly.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Probably something the British understand that we don't looking in from afar.
But having gone over British politics as much as I have (which is a lot for an American but probably not much for a British person) I get the sense that people think the libdems are irrelevant and big fakes. All Clegg and his fellow party members does is shout platitudes. And many libdem supporters are absolute nutbags. This is, of course, true of both Labour and the Conservatives, but they at least have political relevancy to back them up.
The Liberal Democrats try to appeal to both the left and the right and fail at both. It would take a huge seachange in order for them to become relevant. Something as big as the SDP joining with them again, and hopefully the Labour or Conservative government at the time doesn't have a Falklands war that would boost them back into confidence. This is, of course, a pipe dream.
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
They can never make up their mind what they want to be. They campaign as conservatives against the Tories and as Left wingers against Labour. One minute they're promising tax rises on the wealthy to fund social spending and the next they're calling for massive tax cuts.
I appreciate this is little different from either of the main parties but i don't have any faith in them either.
I'm also, and this is unlikely to go down well with our PES friend
, not particularly pro-Europe and the Lib Dems are all for adopting the Euro and deeper integration.Top of the list, though, is they're never going to garner the numbers to get elected anyway. Unless the voting system changes and that's not likely.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
America is the only place I've seen where the parties seem to usually win with actual majorities. The only place where people want to change things is in places like Vermont where the Progressive party is the sole reason for the continued existence of the Republican party.
PES Activist
PES Activists Dublin
That's the voting system in the UK of course, Epi, which is notorious for its lack of balance and fair representation. In most (all?) other EU countries we use a system of proportional representation which means that most EU governments are coalitions of various parties.
KingCondanomation
New member
It's only fair if you look at it from the perspective of what parties deserve. But most democracies are NOT based on electing parties but electing representatives for ridings where a majority would form the governing party.
Proportional representation is more unfair to grassroots democracy of people being represented in their riding and for their riding.
Epicurus
Reasonable
I've always been a fan of PR (proportional representation), but it's inaccurate to suggest that all European countries use it. I support it, Dano, because it forces the parties to actually stand for something concrete and punishes them if they break their own pledges.
Britain of course uses SMP which produces skewed results, Germany elects half the legislature via SMP and the other half via PR. Italy has its own bizarre system that Berlusconi personally put into place to ensure victory, and it will likely be removed once he is gone. Most countries in Europe use either one of the systems above or a combination of them.
Britain of course uses SMP which produces skewed results, Germany elects half the legislature via SMP and the other half via PR. Italy has its own bizarre system that Berlusconi personally put into place to ensure victory, and it will likely be removed once he is gone. Most countries in Europe use either one of the systems above or a combination of them.
KingCondanomation
New member
?
I never suggested they all use it.
You are thinking of these parties as blocks of thinking. They are all individuals and they represent their ridings. The house of Reps is just that, the founders didn't really care which party got hurt or did well, they only cared that people in ridings receive the representative that the majority of them voted for.
This is a big reason why representatives in the US are much more independent and don't vote with their party on all issues.
I'd also throw in that proportional representation means an even more fragile democracy where tough decisions are rarely made because governments can fall so easily.
Epicurus
Reasonable
1.) I was addressing PES who seemed unsure whether or not all of Europe used PR.
2.) Under the American system where we elect individuals you are absolutely correct. What I am saying though is that I prefer a system where the parties stand accountable for concrete platforms over a system where individual legislators may buck the party line and cross the aisle.
3.) You are right that this is a disadvantage to PR and strict party discipline, but I believe that making clear distinctions between parties and holding parties to their platforms is more important.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Germany does technically elect half of its legislature using SMP, but the people who win in SMP are basically moved to the top of the parties list, and everyone is elected as in a completely proportional legislature otherwise (except if a party wins more SMP seats than it deserves due to PR, in which case it keeps the seats despite the dis proportionality).
In France they use the "two-round" system, which is basically like the SMP system besides that it requires that parties actually win a majority in their constituency.
And in Italy parties form together in coalitions, and whichever coalition won the most votes automatically gets 55% of the seats in parliament.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
The big problem with America's party discipline-less SMP system is that what matters with an individual often isn't the issues. It's usually more, hey, who smiles the best? Well, that guys a pretty nice guy, I'm voting for him. So our democracy suffers terribly because actual issues are irrelevant.
There is none of that with parties. You simply vote for the one you agree with most, and personality doesn't get involved. It produces better democracy. Parties SHOULD be blocks of thinking, and you should have a plethora of thinking to choose from, rather than deciding amongst two people "who has the best smile?"
There is none of that with parties. You simply vote for the one you agree with most, and personality doesn't get involved. It produces better democracy. Parties SHOULD be blocks of thinking, and you should have a plethora of thinking to choose from, rather than deciding amongst two people "who has the best smile?"