Follow TV Tropes

Following

British Politics Thread

Go To

This thread exists to discuss British politics.

Political issues related to Northern Ireland and the Crown Dependencies (the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man) are also considered on-topic here if there's no more appropriate OTC thread for them.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

As with other OTC threads, off-topic posts may be thumped or edited by the moderators.


    Original OP 
(I saw Allan mention the lack of one so I thought I'd make one.)

Recent political stuff:

  • The vote to see if Britain should adopt Alternative Voting has failed.
  • Lib Dems lose lots of councils and councillors, whilst Labour make the majority of the gains in England.
  • The Scottish National Party do really well in the elections.

A link to the BBC politics page containing relevant information.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 3rd 2023 at 11:15:30 AM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
FieldMarshalFry Field Marshal of Cracked from World Internet War 1 Since: Oct, 2015 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Field Marshal of Cracked
#31703: Jan 25th 2018 at 4:56:29 AM

seriously? has "MSM is bad" rubbish even infected here? it was the bloody right wing tabloids and broadsheets doing what they do, spread bollocks, no different from the last 100 years, and you can't get much more mainstream than the BBC

advancing the front into TV Tropes
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from a handcart heading to Hell Since: Mar, 2011 Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#31704: Jan 25th 2018 at 5:20:04 AM

I’d say that mainstream media is a good way to describe the papers.

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
EruditeEsotericist Since: May, 2015
#31705: Jan 25th 2018 at 5:25:55 AM

The BBC were good enough to post a fact check demonstrating the reality of the story, even though they did run with it themselves initislly. The major newspapers are mainstream media and they are almost all horrendous.

I know you hate the SNP, Fry, but my comments were fair here.

TommyR01D Since: Feb, 2015
#31706: Jan 25th 2018 at 4:01:56 PM

The Lord Mendelsohnnote , opposition spokesman for International Trade, has been ejected from the Labour frontbench. [1]

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#31707: Jan 25th 2018 at 4:21:48 PM

Yikes, surprised he wasn't expelled from the party outright (does that even happen in the UK very often)?

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#31709: Jan 27th 2018 at 6:16:17 AM

[up]How not surprised am I? tongue I just wish they'd stop this kind of idiocy. -_-

But, they be doing them. <_<

singularityshot Since: Dec, 2012
#31710: Jan 28th 2018 at 11:56:49 AM

Man, the Dispatches stuff on "Politicians for hire - Brexit Edition" was small beer.

Who did they catch in their net? Andrew Lansley, who we already knew was a shill for Big Pharma having tried to dismantle the NHS for no other reason than #hits and giggles.

Peter Lilley, who was between jobs per se as he was waiting for his appointment to the Lords.

Andrew Mitchell, who has already decided to replace George Osborne as the MP who just wants to make bank knowing his political career went up the spout with Plebgate.

Thing is, they all adhered to the letter of the law / code of standards (if not the spirit). Two of the three are Lords, or would be Lords so can't be voted out. And none are really that influential - they may think they are but that what you say in an interview.

It's a classic case of if this stuff annoys you, change the rules or the system. Which we already want to do anyway.

If you wanted to chase anything down from this stuff I would say it was funny that both Lansley and Lilley both claimed friendship and influence with Liam Fox: but again, we already knew that Liam Fox has hilariously bad judgement when it comes to friends (Werritty werritty werritty werritty).

SebastianGray Since: Apr, 2011
#31711: Jan 29th 2018 at 3:14:37 AM

Some farmers are receiving death threats from militant vegans

Veganism has been described as the fastest growing lifestyle movement. For some concern about animal welfare leads them to actively campaign against all forms of the meat industry. But are some of those activists taking it too far?

"When you're being called murderers and rapists, that is overstepping the mark, for fairly obvious reasons," says Alison Waugh, a trainee farmer in Northumberland.

She has received death threats due to her work and told the Victoria Derbyshire programme other farmers are feeling threatened.

"Which is quite ironic from people that want peace for animals, but then they tell you, 'I hope you and your family go die in a hole for what you do,'" she says.

"You've got people storming the meat mart, spraying graffiti...that's when it's not OK, when you've got people worrying if their cows are going to be safe tonight."

One activist group is called the Save Movement, which says it has a non-violent approach to campaigning. It has 42 groups in the UK and 100 worldwide.

Its activists hold vigils outside abattoirs and aim to turn the world vegan by sharing images on social media of the animals' treatment.

While I am not a hostile to vegans as some people I have worked with in the restaurant industry, things like this are, of course, taking things far to far. Such intolerance of other people's lifestyles does seem to be on the rise although I am someone who has always been of the opinion that you can think what you like as long as you act politely towards those who do not share such views I am serious coming to the conclusion that there should be some limitations put on the right to protest. Not banning it of course, just imposing stricter guidelines and regulation as to where and when protests should be conducts (but then I am a great believer in strict regulation in all things).

Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#31712: Jan 29th 2018 at 3:18:20 AM

[up]I thought death threats and violence were already not considered protected by the right to protest. Those vegans have clearly crossed a line.

Disgusted, but not surprised
SebastianGray Since: Apr, 2011
#31713: Jan 29th 2018 at 3:30:04 AM

[up]True but some of the more aggressive styles of protest that have been on the rise lately that don't quite break harassment laws can still cause emotional distress for those going about their lawful business. Other instances include recent anti-abortion protests.

edited 29th Jan '18 3:30:30 AM by SebastianGray

Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well
Wyldchyld (Old as dirt)
#31714: Jan 29th 2018 at 5:38:50 PM

Yes, the American style of abortion protest has started to gain ground in the UK. Local councils have begin the process of investigating whether or not they can make these protests illegal. Some councils have already begin.

Ordinary residents who just happen to live near such clinics are being harassed by the protesters as well.

edited 29th Jan '18 5:45:05 PM by Wyldchyld

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#31715: Jan 30th 2018 at 12:06:46 AM

BuzzFeed exclusive: A new British government Brexit analysis.

The government's new analysis of the impact of Brexit says the UK would be worse off outside the European Union under every scenario modelled, Buzz Feed News can reveal.

The assessment, which is titled “EU Exit Analysis – Cross Whitehall Briefing” and dated January 2018, looked at three of the most plausible Brexit scenarios based on existing EU arrangements.

Under a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, UK growth would be 5% lower over the next 15 years compared to current forecasts, according to the analysis.

The "no deal" scenario, which would see the UK revert to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, would reduce growth by 8% over that period. The softest Brexit option of continued single-market access through membership of the European Economic Area would, in the longer term, still lower growth by 2%.

These calculations do not take into account any short-term hits to the economy from Brexit, such as the cost of adjusting the economy to new customs arrangements.

Asked why the prime minister was not making the analysis public, a D Ex EU source told Buzz Feed News: "Because it's embarrassing."

Even though the analysis assumes that the UK will agree a trade deal with the US, roll over dozens of the EU’s current trade agreements, and consider loosening regulations after Brexit, there is no scenario that does not leave the country worse off.

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#31716: Jan 30th 2018 at 1:56:35 AM

So I take it we're going to see a new barrage of "Britain is tired of so-called 'experts' and their lies" then?

"Yup. That tasted purple."
SebastianGray Since: Apr, 2011
#31717: Jan 30th 2018 at 2:03:09 AM

[up]The government's current line is "They didn't look into the type of deal we want that the EU says we can't have".

Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#31718: Jan 30th 2018 at 2:18:34 AM

So in other words we're buggered in everything except the absolute best-case scenario?

"Yup. That tasted purple."
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#31719: Jan 30th 2018 at 2:34:13 AM

[up] The article points out that the report doesn't cover short-term hits.

These calculations do not take into account any short-term hits to the economy from Brexit, such as the cost of adjusting the economy to new customs arrangements.

So even in the 'best case', which I assume is the Soft Brexit with a 2% hit to growth, you might still be buggered depending on how bad those short-term hits are.

[up][up]

"They didn't look into the type of deal we want that the EU says we can't have".

They will only be able to get such a deal if their negotiators can convinces the EU otherwise. Which means relying on the skill of the UK's Brexit negotiators.

In other words, it's not happening.

edited 30th Jan '18 2:36:47 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#31720: Jan 30th 2018 at 4:12:07 AM

Leave: We have assessment reports.

Parliament: Can we see it?

Leave: No, that would put us in a bad negotiation position.

Parliament: ??? But wouldn't that mean that the assessment is bad?

Leave: No, we just don't want to show our hand.

Parliament: But the EU has it's own assessment already and it doesn't look good.

Leave: Yeah...we don't have an assessment.

Parliament: But you said....

Leave: Well, we don't have one, deal with it.

Kahn: I have an assessment and it looks kind of bad.

Leave: Lies!

Sturgeon: I have an assessment and it looks really bad!

Leave: Lies!

Leaker: Here is the governments assessment.

Sturgeon: Hey, this comes to the same conclusion mine did....

Leave: No comment. But you are all traitors.

EU: Hey, guys, don't you think that it is time to come properly to the negotiation table? We would like to get on with it.

AngelusNox The law in the night from somewhere around nothing Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
The law in the night
#31722: Jan 30th 2018 at 9:31:36 AM

Something interesting showed up on my The Economist Feed today.

     The Economist: Labour is right—Karl Marx has a lot to teach today’s politicians 

Labour is right—Karl Marx has a lot to teach today’s politicians

The shadow chancellor's comment provoked scorn. Yet Marx becomes more relevant by the day

AN UNOFFICIAL rule of British elections holds that you don’t mention big thinkers. On May 7th John Mc Donnell, the shadow chancellor, broke this rule by mentioning not just any old big thinker but Karl Marx. “I believe there’s a lot to learn from reading ‘Capital’,” he declared. The next day Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, described Marx as “a great economist”.

This produced jubilation on the right. The Daily Telegraph dismissed Messrs Mc Donnell and Corbyn as “the Marx brothers”. The Daily Mail reminded its readers of the murderous history of communism. David Gauke, a Conservative minister, warned that “Labour’s Marxist leadership” was planning to turn Britain into a “hard-left experiment”. He added for good measure that Marx’s thinking is “nonsensical”.

Yet Mr Mc Donnell is right: there is an enormous amount to learn from Marx. Indeed, much of what Marx said seems to become more relevant by the day. The essence of his argument is that the capitalist class consists not of wealth creators but of rent seekers—people who are skilled at expropriating other people’s work and presenting it as their own. Marx was blind to the importance of entrepreneurs in creating something from nothing. He ignored the role of managers in improving productivity. But a glance at British business confirms that there is a lot of rent seeking going on. In 1980 the bosses of the 100 biggest listed firms earned 25 times more than a typical employee. In 2016 they earned 130 times more. Their swollen salaries come with fat pensions, private health-care and golden hellos and goodbyes.

The justification for this bonanza is that you get what you pay for: companies claim they hire chief executives on the open market and pay them according to their performance. But the evidence is brutal. Most CE Os are company men, who work their way up through the ranks, rather than free agents. In 2000-08 the FTSE all-share index fell by 30% but the pay for the bosses running those firms rose 80%. J.K. Galbraith once said that “the salary of the chief executive officer of the large corporation is not market reward for achievement. It is frequently in the nature of a warm personal gesture by the individual to himself.” Corporate Britain is more subtle: CE Os sit on each other’s boards and engage in an elaborate exchange of such gestures.

The political system is no less rife with rent-seeking. Politicians routinely cash in on their life of public service by transforming themselves from gamekeepers into poachers when they retire, lobbying departments they once ran, offering advice to companies they once regulated and producing platitudinous speeches for exorbitant amounts of money. Tony Blair became rich in his retirement by offering advice to bankers and third-world dictators. George Osborne, a former chancellor, is also cashing in: he makes more than £650,000 ($840,000) for working for Black Rock investment managers one day a week, earns many tens of thousands for speeches and edits a London newspaper, the Evening Standard.

Marx predicted that capitalism would become more concentrated as it advanced. The number of listed companies has declined at a time when profits are close to their highest levels ever. Concentration is particularly pronounced in the most advanced sectors of the economy. Google controls 85% of Britain’s search-engine traffic. Marx was also right that capitalism would be increasingly dominated by finance, which would become increasingly reckless and crisis-prone.

What about his most famous prediction—that capitalism inevitably produces immiseration for the poor even as it produces super-profits for the rich? “Immiseration” is too strong a word to describe the condition of the poor in a country with a welfare state and a minimum wage. Yet many trends are worrying. Average wages are still below their level before the financial crisis in 2008 and are not expected to exceed it for several years. The rise of the Uber economy threatens to turn millions of people into casual workers who eat only what they can kill.

Full Marx

The problem with Marx is not that his analysis is nonsensical, as Mr Gauke maintains, but that his solution was far worse than the disease. And the problem with Messrs Corbyn and Mc Donnell is not that they have learned something from Marx but they haven’t learned anything from the past hundred years of history. Mr Mc Donnell is a fan not just of Marx but also of Lenin and Trotsky. Mr Corbyn described Fidel Castro as a “champion of social justice”. A leaked draft of the Labour manifesto resurrects defunct plans to renationalise industries and extend collective bargaining.

The Tory party is heading for a substantial victory in large part because Labour’s leaders are so unreconstructed. But it would be a mistake for the Conservatives to ignore the lessons of the master himself. As Trotsky once put it, “You may not be interested in the dialectic, but the dialectic is interested in you.” The financial crisis suggested that the economic system is worryingly fragile. The vote for Brexit suggested that millions of people are profoundly unhappy with the status quo.

The genius of the British system has always been to reform in order to prevent social breakdown. This means doing more than just engaging in silly gestures such as fixing energy prices, as the Conservatives proposed this week (silly because this will suppress investment and lead eventually to higher prices). It means preventing monopolies from forming: Britain’s antitrust rules need to be updated for an age where information is the most valuable resource and network effects convey huge advantages. It means ending the CEO salary racket, not least by giving more power to shareholders. It means thinking seriously about the casualisation of work. And it means closing the revolving door between politics and business. The best way to save yourself from being Marx’s next victim is to start taking him seriously.

edited 30th Jan '18 9:32:00 AM by AngelusNox

Inter arma enim silent leges
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#31723: Jan 30th 2018 at 9:42:36 AM

I like how you can tell that was written in May 2017. tongue

What's precedent ever done for us?
AngelusNox The law in the night from somewhere around nothing Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
The law in the night
#31724: Jan 30th 2018 at 9:45:05 AM

[up]Most of my feeds tend to not be exactly recent, specially when it is about op-eds.

Inter arma enim silent leges
math792d Since: Jun, 2011 Relationship Status: Drift compatible
#31725: Jan 30th 2018 at 12:14:40 PM

I do love the hyperbole of the phrase 'Marx' next victim.'

It conjures the image of a hand rising put of a grave to strangle capitalists in their sleep.

Still not embarrassing enough to stan billionaires or tech companies.

Total posts: 49,280
Top