Politics And AGW/GW

[Devonian]

Dev, I hope you are not implying that I "carp and ridicule".

No. I do think LG is so doing and while I've not read the article I suspect the flavour of the 'antigreen' piece would not exactly be complimentary...

I say again I respect people who stand up and be counted. Though, I will also say that I don't include violence in that - just to be clear.

[laserguy]

No. I do think LG is so doing and while I've not read the article I suspect the flavour of the 'antigreen' piece would not exactly be complimentary...

Go on Dev,read it! I don't think it mentions Hansen (I'm not going back to check!),it's just dripping with straightforward common-sense and free from insults and put-downs. No,really.

[Devonian]

Go on Dev,read it! I don't think it mentions Hansen (I'm not going back to check!),it's just dripping with straightforward common-sense and free from insults and put-downs. No,really.

You're joking? please tell me you are

Look at the sub title of the blog 'warmist crook Hansen above' and tell me again it's free form insults and put-down. Really, LG, I expect better from you!

[Thundery wintry showers]

I was, some time ago, a political activist for one of the main three political parties. Such political activist (of whatever party tbh) work damn hard to try and overcome the kind of political apathy some recent posts represent. It is hair tearingly irritating (to the point I eventually gave up - but at least I tried) that people both criticise politician but also do sweet FA to change things - up to and including not even bothering to vote . Free voting, democracy, is a privilege bought by the activism of many who suffered to bring it about and, yes, blood by those who died in war so we might have it. It is not something to casually not do!

Don't like our politics? The get up and do something about it! Complaining about it but doing nothing I just don't get.

Without civil disobedience I think we would still be in the dark ages. I might not agree with someone but, by god, I respect people who get of their butts and do something about something they feel strongly about!

And yet, all some can do is carp at and ridicule such 'stand up and be counted' actions.

I agree with the overall ethos of the post, but not the bit about voting. Some people who don't vote are refusing to vote because they don't agree with the ideals of any of the political parties- so if they voted they would be effectively stating support for something they didn't agree with.

But yes, we have way too much moaning, in conjunction with shrugging our shoulders and saying "that's life" in this country, and constructive action is what we need more of- both to improve morale and improve the world. My main contribution to date has been putting a detailed manifesto up on the internet.

[Methuselah]

Some people who don't vote are refusing to vote because they don't agree with the ideals of any of the political parties- so if they voted they would be effectively stating support for something they didn't agree with.

Those are precisely my own sentiments, regarding my democratic right to vote - or not, Ian.

[Admiral_Bobski]

Those are precisely my own sentiments, regarding my democratic right to vote - or not, Ian.

I did vote at the last general election (not for the current bunch of jokers, I hasten to add!), but I have to confess that I actually forgot to vote at the last local election. A long day, involving an impromptu trip to the hospital with my youngest, meant that I finally remembered at 10.10pm (and only then thanks to switching on the telly and seeing the news).

Oops!

CB

[laserguy]

You're joking? please tell me you are

Look at the sub title of the blog 'warmist crook Hansen above' and tell me again it's free form insults and put-down. Really, LG, I expect better from you!

I meant the specific article! The only thing in it that I can find remotely 'risky' is the word 'ignoramus' in it's title - that's it! As for Hansen,well yes it is becoming increasingly difficult these days,to realistically describe him as anything else. Top blog by the way,Greenie Watch.

[LadyPakal]

Register your disgust at your options by writing 'none of the above' or words to that effect on your voting slip, but do not 'not vote'.

The number of spoiled papers would be an interesting thing to keep an eye on if more people did this. We really need a 'none' option on the voting form.

[Thundery wintry showers]

If there was a "None of the above" option or similar there's little doubt that I would end up voting regardless of the circumstances...

[Methuselah]

Register your disgust at your options by writing 'none of the above' or words to that effect on your voting slip, but do not 'not vote'.

But, the final count will come out the same anyway LP. So, why waste shoeleather?

[Devonian]

Register your disgust at your options by writing 'none of the above' or words to that effect on your voting slip, but do not 'not vote'.

The number of spoiled papers would be an interesting thing to keep an eye on if more people did this. We really need a 'none' option on the voting form.

But it still amounts to 'I don't like any of you, so for ten whole minutes I'll get off my butt and write four words on the ballot paper'. To my mind it's not exactly putting the effort in for change.

I think if people don't like our politicians and the job they do they should stand for election themselves or stop criticising.

I meant the specific article! The only thing in it that I can find remotely 'risky' is the word 'ignoramus' in it's title - that's it! As for Hansen,well yes it is becoming increasingly difficult these days,to realistically describe him as anything else. Top blog by the way,Greenie Watch.

'Warmist crook Hansen' at the top of the blog below the title make the authors view absolutely clear. It is not a compliment and neither is the word ignoramus. I'm all for freedom of speech but lets not pretend 'Greenie watch' (indeed the title is not a compliment either) is free of insult.

The Greenie watch blog is a series of politically motivated screeds in which the chance of finding a good word about anyone who has ever been within 100 miles of 'Hansen' or 'Gore' is minimal. zero. Science it most certainly is not.

[Kained]

But it still amounts to 'I don't like any of you, so for ten whole minutes I'll get off my butt and write four words on the ballot paper'. To my mind it's not exactly putting the effort in for change.

I think if people don't like our politicians and the job they do they should stand for election themselves or stop criticising.

Actually, purposeful spoiling of a ballot paper does have an effect, perhaps not on the current instance of the vote but if enough votes are spoilt then it should be a way of showing politicians that they are not offering a choice worthy of the vote. Far better than not voting at all and something anyone can do without becoming politically active.

I agree entirely with your second sentence.

[osmposm]

Some people who don't vote are refusing to vote because they don't agree with the ideals of any of the political parties- so if they voted they would be effectively stating support for something they didn't agree with.

If there really isn't a single candidate on the ballot that you (and this post is not addressed to 'you', TWS, at all) find yourself able to countenance seriously supporting, there are two immediate options. One, vote for a fringe independent or loony candidate with no hope of election: the Liberal Party also fulfilled this function for many years, and in most places its successor does much the same. Two, spoil your ballot. Both at least show that could be a**ed to turn up, and show you as a probable caring - but protesting - voter. Just not turning up allows you to be dismissed as apathetic and/or ignorant. If even 10% of the electorate made 'protest votes' I assure you that the main parties would - and in marginal by-elections, do - take note.

The other thing to consider is whether if your ideals are not remotely represented - even in major part - by anybody on the ballot, then perhaps it is you who is out of touch with realistic views, not them?! You are never going to find a party that stands for everything you believe in, and stands for nothing that you do not (surely goes without saying?), but the gamut of political views shown on every ballot paper I've looked at (and with very, very few exceptions I've looked at all those available to me for the last 40 years) is pretty huge: Marxist to BNP via the centre-right (by historical standards) major parties, greens, UKIP, Referendum, Monster-Raving and a host of single-issue independents. I find huge issues in all parties' manifestos, but I try to find the one that I believe that is either least-worst, or has a big commitment that I share to at least a couple of important policy issues.

If you cannot operate democratically on even this level, then there is only one thing for it: become politically active yourself! Involve yourself, protest, organize, join existing parties and change them from the inside - or set something up yourself in precise accordance with your own views. It's hard, relentless, infuriatingly frustrating work - as is writing cogent, well-argued and evidenced letters to the press and people in local government, for example, but they can have results.

But the vast majority of people who wanted - for good or bad reasons - political power, great or small, got it because they worked hard to get it. Just shouting on the touchlines is little use. As you say, TWS, there's too much moaning. If you care, and have an interesting alternative view, then express it properly. If everybody though there was no point in talking/arguing/voting where it matters - not just on weather websites - we would have, quite simply, anarchy.

Edited February 23, 2009 by osmposm

[noggin]

I think if people don't like our politicians and the job they do they should stand for election themselves or stop criticising.

I have to disagree with you there, Dev. It would not be practical for most (I would imagine) people to stand for parliament. If I stood, for example, then who would pay my mortgage, look after my family etc.etc. How would I fund my campaign, how would I drum up support, how would I pay my bills in the meantime? Loads of things........it's just not as easy as the words "stand for election themselves" imply.

Draconian though it might seem, my view is that if one doesn't exercise one's right to vote, then one doesn't have any right to complain about how we are governed, as one has not taken part in the democratic ( ) process.

There are options beside standing for election anyway, such as joining lobby groups.

I was at one time a shop steward for USDAW. It was my very small effort for shopworkers, but a contribution, nevertheless.

[Thundery wintry showers]

I think if people don't like our politicians and the job they do they should stand for election themselves or stop criticising.

Most people have jobs, families etc. and simply don't have the time to go into the effort to do all of that. It's much, much easier said than done. And if nobody criticises, it makes it less likely that anything will change. The "that's life, deal with it" approach is one of the biggest barriers to progress today.

The other thing to consider is whether if your ideals are not remotely represented - even in major part - by anybody on the ballot, then perhaps it is you who is out of touch with realistic views, not them?! You are never going to find a party that stands for everything you believe in, and stands for nothing that you do not (surely goes without saying?), but the gamut of political views shown on every ballot paper I've looked at (and with very, very few exceptions I've looked at all those available to me for the last 40 years) is pretty huge: Marxist to BNP via the centre-right (by historical standards) major parties, greens, UKIP, Referendum, Monster-Raving and a host of single-issue independents. I find huge issues in all parties' manifestos, but I try to find the one that I believe that is either least-worst, or has a big commitment that I share to at least a couple of important policy issues.

As far as I can see, Labour are basically Tories in disguise (very little difference between their respective ethoses), Lib Dems are fast moving in the same direction, Greens are a one-issue party (environment), UKIP are obsessed with UK independence, BNP are bordering on fascist, and the others haven't a hope in hell of getting in. Among the three main parties in particular there is very little variation. Do we vote for Tory 1, Tory 2 or Tory 3? Or do we vote for someone with as much chance of getting in as of winning the Lottery.

The "least worst" bit is important. We are repeatedly told on this forum, "you voted X in, therefore you have no right to complain about the law, because X brought in the law, and the law is the law". But if people voted X mainly because they thought X was the least worst option, that doesn't mean they supported X.

I have indeed looked out for outlets to express my alternative views. I have a personal manifesto up on the internet which is the product of years of analysis of issues. I have looked for campaign groups to join, but have invariably found that they tend to support either one extreme view or the opposite extreme, with nothing in between. Also, I usually find that when I challenge accepted ways of thinking, I find it hard to get support, because the masses tend to think "I couldn't give a toss" or "that's life" and just sit in their comfort zones. Conventional ways of thinking are defended using a combination of defensiveness, hostility, circular reasoning and "refuting" alternatives by exclaiming, "You can't change it? HOW do you? HOW???" and then throwing out my suggestions as soon as a flaw is found in one of them. There's also the tendency for people to say, "instead of preaching for change, just let people have their opinions, and get on with your own life, and your attitude to problems should be, "that's life, deal with it, everything happens for a reason" type stuff.

Okay, maybe one can argue that I still haven't done enough. But it's hardly as if I haven't tried. Some of my unorthodox views might well be unrealistic, and while it will hurt to realise that, I'm prepared to accept that, as I only want the best way forward. But most of my views tend to be dismissed in a manner where I'm like the naughty schoolboy who dares to answer his teacher back- such is the defensiveness of conventional ways of doing and thinking- and it is frustrating, as it suggests to me that I might actually have some valid points that people try to silence in order to protect the status quo.

Edited February 23, 2009 by Thundery wintry showers

[Solar Cycles]

Most people have jobs, families etc. and simply don't have the time to go into the effort to do all of that. It's much, much easier said than done. And if nobody criticises, it makes it less likely that anything will change. The "that's life, deal with it" approach is one of the biggest barriers to progress today.

As far as I can see, Labour are basically Tories in disguise (very little difference between their respective ethoses), Lib Dems are fast moving in the same direction, Greens are a one-issue party (environment), UKIP are obsessed with UK independence, BNP are bordering on fascist, and the others haven't a hope in hell of getting in. Among the three main parties in particular there is very little variation. Do we vote for Tory 1, Tory 2 or Tory 3? Or do we vote for someone with as much chance of getting in as of winning the Lottery.

The "least worst" bit is important. We are repeatedly told on this forum, "you voted X in, therefore you have no right to complain about the law, because X brought in the law, and the law is the law". But if people voted X mainly because they thought X was the least worst option, that doesn't mean they supported X.

I have indeed looked out for outlets to express my alternative views. I have a personal manifesto up on the internet which is the product of years of analysis of issues. I have looked for campaign groups to join, but have invariably found that they tend to support either one extreme view or the opposite extreme, with nothing in between. Also, I usually find that when I challenge accepted ways of thinking, I find it hard to get support, because the masses tend to think "I couldn't give a toss" or "that's life" and just sit in their comfort zones. Conventional ways of thinking are defended using a combination of defensiveness, hostility, circular reasoning and "refuting" alternatives by exclaiming, "You can't change it? HOW do you? HOW???" and then throwing out my suggestions as soon as a flaw is found in one of them. There's also the tendency for people to say, "instead of preaching for change, just let people have their opinions, and get on with your own life, and your attitude to problems should be, "that's life, deal with it, everything happens for a reason" type stuff.

Okay, maybe one can argue that I still haven't done enough. But it's hardly as if I haven't tried. Some of my unorthodox views might well be unrealistic, and while it will hurt to realise that, I'm prepared to accept that, as I only want the best way forward. But most of my views tend to be dismissed in a manner where I'm like the naughty schoolboy who dares to answer his teacher back- such is the defensiveness of conventional ways of doing and thinking- and it is frustrating, as it suggests to me that I might actually have some valid points that people try to silence in order to protect the status quo.

UKIP for me, due to the vast amounts of monies wasted within the EEC. Then all the crackpot ideas, which are now part and parcel of our society!

[Thundery wintry showers]

Draconian though it might seem, my view is that if one doesn't exercise one's right to vote, then one doesn't have any right to complain about how we are governed, as one has not taken part in the democratic ( ) process.

I've also seen an argument made many times on this forum: "if one does exercise one's right to vote, then one doesn't have any right to complain about how we are governed, as one has taken part in the democratic process, the democracy said X is to be voted in, and therefore you must accept X's policies- the law is the law, end of discussion." This argument is especially applied to cases when a person complains about the policies of a party that he or she voted for.

And if someone spoils the ballot paper or writes "none of the above", you could argue that they still haven't voted and therefore have no right to complain. But if they vote for the least of the evils, rather than someone they genuinely want to get into power, then you could argue "they voted for the party, therefore they wanted the party into power- because we live in a perfect democracy, and we know this to be true, because if we weren't, we wouldn't be living in a perfect democracy, and since we are, we are."

It's a no-win situation, it really is.

[VillagePlank]

If the situation really is that massive voter apathy is the result that no party can represent a majority in a reasonably large democracy (is apathy larger than turnout?) - why the hell aren't you standing as independents?

Surely, we all of the wonderful facets of human nature your views are shared, at least, by your social circle; which, by extension, could be many thousands of people, which can be enough to overturn a marginal.

As Dev said, people have died to present a system - notable the suffragettes for women . It seems more than a little rich to me that people choose to complain about the quality of politics, and choose another way to spend their life, when, if one takes the time to reflect on reality, we all live and work in a social system regulated by a government. If you don't like that social system, in my opinion, you have the right, and the duty, to do so something about it by joining the government.

I don't want a country of 25-40 year olds who simply claim "I can't find someone to represent me"

Of course, the flip side is - if apathy is smaller than turnout - who cares anyway? Go down the pub and moan at your mates.

Edited February 23, 2009 by VillagePlank

[Thundery wintry showers]

I have to disagree with you there, Dev. It would not be practical for most (I would imagine) people to stand for parliament. If I stood, for example, then who would pay my mortgage, look after my family etc.etc. How would I fund my campaign, how would I drum up support, how would I pay my bills in the meantime? Loads of things........it's just not as easy as the words "stand for election themselves" imply.

That quote from Noggin's post is a pretty apt response.

[Devonian]

I have to disagree with you there, Dev. It would not be practical for most (I would imagine) people to stand for parliament. If I stood, for example, then who would pay my mortgage, look after my family etc.etc. How would I fund my campaign, how would I drum up support, how would I pay my bills in the meantime? Loads of things........it's just not as easy as the words "stand for election themselves" imply.

Oh, I agree, it's not easy. And, indeed, for most of us it's not an opinion. But, there are other options in local govt - it's tragic that many councillors get returned unopposed. Otoh, I've met people so driven by their political views and the honest need to serve they've spent a lifetime doorsteeping and failing in repeated elections to get elected. Admirable people imo - even though I disagreed with them in some ways.

Draconian though it might seem, my view is that if one doesn't exercise one's right to vote, then one doesn't have any right to complain about how we are governed, as one has not taken part in the democratic ( ) process.

Well, it certainly makes any such complaints less hard to take seriously.

There are options beside standing for election anyway, such as joining lobby groups.

I was at one time a shop steward for USDAW. It was my very small effort for shopworkers, but a contribution, nevertheless.

Indeed. And perhaps what I'm railing against is apathy about many things, apathy in general.

Edited February 23, 2009 by Devonian

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.seeddaily.com/reports/Mass_Medi...arming_999.html

is this the right spot for this?

[Thundery wintry showers]

What some of us are getting riled about is the fact that all those who haven't voted are being lumped together with "apathy". Apathy, surely, is attitudes like, "I can't be bothered to vote and I don't care who gets voted in- what will be will be". I despise apathy just as much as Devonian and others do. But Peter Tattum's approach, for example, certainly isn't along those lines.

As I say, I resent being considered part of "apathy", as I have actually tried to be pro-active. I spent years analysing various issues, and put my conclusions up as a manifesto on my website because I couldn't find anywhere else to put them- and I refine my manifesto with time, as I get exposure to new ideas and find areas of my views that are unworkable or otherwise wide of the mark. And if I can find a way to get my thoughts some extra exposure, provided that it doesn't involve crippling other areas of my life, then I will seriously consider it.

I've looked at various lobby groups, but the problem is that the vast majority of lobby groups take up one extreme position or the other, and refuse to consider the other side's point of view. Having a view that falls between the two extremes is seen as indecisive or giving a "compromise" position. In reality, it is quite possible to develop a strong, decisive view that falls between the two extremes that takes various angles into account and aims to pinpoint the best all-round way forward. But in my experience, most lobbyists tend to be especially intolerant of those who hold such positions, as moderate positions often pose a greater potential threat to the soundness of the "party line" than extreme positions, and the usual response is to resort to authoritarian bully tactics and circular reasoning to try and silence the dissenting voice.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything about it. But what I am saying is that it's much easier said than done, and in addition, it requires enough people to want to take said action. If I campaigned for change and people joined in, I might get somewhere, but if they all said, "it can't be helped because it's just the way it is", I wouldn't fancy my chances.

Edited February 23, 2009 by Thundery wintry showers

[Methuselah]

I agree, TWS...My own perspective is that, as I don't vote then I cannot really complain at individual parties. To me, it no longer seems to matter who gets in: the banks, corporations and conglomerates run the Western world, IMO. But, that said, with sufficient regulation, things could be better for me; which would, of course, make them worse for someone else...

IMO, I have a democratic choice of whether-or-not I vote. I am not going to go to a polling station (just because some activist or another lost his or her life in 1846) and write nothing on a ballot paper. What is the point of that? :lol:

[Gray-Wolf]

I still think it is the 'vote' that is the most important (and with so many folk laying down their lives, in the belief of the power of it, across the world over time).

IMHO we MUST use our vote if even only in remembrance of those who brought it to us.

I'm sure that if the number of spoilt votes equals or exceeds the votes of the winning party it causes a void vote and a new one is set up .

How many 'null' elections would there be if we ALL used our votes and the 'apathetic' just spoilt their ballot papers???

If you want change (real political change, from the bottom up) then this may be one of the 'polite' ways of achieving it. :lol:

Edit: even if it were not true about the 'spoilt ballot' if a ballot turned a 100% turnout and over 1/2 the papers were deliberately spoiled (with the same message?) what would happen? If this happened across the country what would happen?

Of course , then you do have to motivate the 'true apathetic' to achieve such a thing..... LOL.

Edited February 24, 2009 by Gray-Wolf

[laserguy]

IMHO we MUST use our vote...

Maybe you're right there,GW. Time to make it compulsory? I've always voted,never missed any including local ones. I don't know about apathy,but how can the result of any vote be taken seriously when hardly anyone's bothered to do so ?? That's why I too am losing interest in making the effort,do you see?