ChatterBank3 mins ago
I Know I'm Quite Thick And Certainly No Political Animal But . . .
. . . why are we seeing so much forging of alliances between the various parties? Why do we need Political parties anyway? We're told it's so they can force through unpopular policies. Partnering of parties plus the 'big stick' of the three-line whip suggests to me that this is no democracy, merely a way of pushing through policies that only a small number want.
In a REAL democracy the leader of the party with the most seats should form the government - it shouldn't matter that they could be out-voted, that only matters if their policy is either selfish or not in the general public's interest - if it's generally accepted it's the correct path it'll be voted on be passed. Possibly having 650 independent MPs may be going too far but I think it'd be better than what we have now.
In a REAL democracy the leader of the party with the most seats should form the government - it shouldn't matter that they could be out-voted, that only matters if their policy is either selfish or not in the general public's interest - if it's generally accepted it's the correct path it'll be voted on be passed. Possibly having 650 independent MPs may be going too far but I think it'd be better than what we have now.
Answers
Lew, the working people only have a vote, which political parties want, because they fought and suffered to obtain the vote. Property (which includes wealth ) = Power and those with Property want to keep it and usually grow it; they would rather only people with Property had a vote. Unfortunatel y people with Property probably run the UK (as they run the US ) but...
23:57 Mon 23rd Mar 2015
Lew, the working people only have a vote, which political parties want, because they fought and suffered to obtain the vote.
Property (which includes wealth ) = Power and those with Property want to keep it and usually grow it; they would rather only people with Property had a vote.
Unfortunately people with Property probably run the UK (as they run the US ) but the charade of 'democracy' gives it legitimacy.
Political parties are largely part of the charade, and those with Property
have competing interests in gaining more individual Property and must strike a balance in giving those without Property certain titbits to inhibit that group from seizing that Property and also to use those without property to increase their own Property.
Have a listen to this guy. he will give a US version but the general idea is universal:
http:// www.tuc radio.o rg/Pare nti_Pat hologyW ealth_O NE.mp3
http:// www.tuc radio.o rg/Pare nti_Pat hologyW ealth_T WO.mp3
The are from this site and he seems honest 'working class' to me, but make up your OWN mind
http:// www.tuc radio.o rg/pare nti.htm l
Property (which includes wealth ) = Power and those with Property want to keep it and usually grow it; they would rather only people with Property had a vote.
Unfortunately people with Property probably run the UK (as they run the US ) but the charade of 'democracy' gives it legitimacy.
Political parties are largely part of the charade, and those with Property
have competing interests in gaining more individual Property and must strike a balance in giving those without Property certain titbits to inhibit that group from seizing that Property and also to use those without property to increase their own Property.
Have a listen to this guy. he will give a US version but the general idea is universal:
http://
http://
The are from this site and he seems honest 'working class' to me, but make up your OWN mind
http://
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.