Doctor Vee has criticised Bob Piper’s remarks about Liberty Central. He chose to take a somewhat sarcastic approach, but there is an underlying point worth exploring. A point I see that has now been picked up by Pete.
Liberty central is a coalition across the political spectrum. Bob’s dislike of coalitions is not new in British politics. Indeed, many of those in the two main parties would find that the idea of a coalition government, for example, sticking in their craw. This is, perhaps, the main objection to a shift from our first-past-the-post electoral system in favour of some sort of proportional representation. The current status quo does, at least, mean that one party maintains a firm grip on power during its tenure – and, ostensibly, it is a majority party.
That the last point is manifestly untrue, is why there is now a backlash building. A PR system may well give undue influence to smaller parties through a coalition, but the current arrangement has given us electoral dictatorship by an immovable minority party with no means available to the electorate to influence them between elections. Political lobbying of ones MP is a pointless, soul-destroying exercise in futility.
Coalitions do, indeed, have weaknesses. Internal differences can lead to the breakup of the coalition and that may lead to more elections. Italy was well known during the seventies and eighties for its regular elections.
However, back to the main point – that of the principle of coalition. Bob dislikes his political opponents – indeed, he is rather dismissive of them:
I dislike intensely Liberal Democrats. I consider them to be, broadly speaking, spineless, hypocritical snivelling shits.
Really? Broadly? And how many would that work out to be? Most of them? 75%, perhaps? As much as 90%, maybe? Not too much of a sweeping statement of the utterly inane. That’s a bit like saying that all Labour councillors are mindless jerks with mouths where their brains should be (or was I thinking of something else?) – except that it isn’t true. My Labour councillors happen to be decent well meaning people who work hard at what they do. One of them is a friend. As someone who was raised “old” Labour, who actively participated in the trade union movement and was a paid up member of the Labour Party until the Party became so utterly authoritarian, that I couldn’t remain, at no time did I dislike my political opponents because they held a different political opinion. Why should I? I now regard Bob a political opponent as he supports the Labour political machine; but why should I dislike him? I don’t know him well enough to draw such a conclusion. Come to that, I might find that on a personal level, I could like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Blunkett… Okay, maybe that’s stretching it a bit…
Doctor Vee pointed out that the Labour movement evolved from a coalition. Bob’s response was dismissive:
You may be engrossed in the events of 1903, but they are not big news around here.
The good doctor wasn’t engrossed, he was simply making a point – and a good one. The Labour movement came about because groups from the left banded together to form it. In that way, it is no different to what is happening here. Coalitions are what we do. Whenever people gather together for a common aim, you get a coalition. Political parties are coalitions, and when the governing party loses its way, invariably the opposition to it will come from across the spectrum – and you get a coalition.
Does this make me a Labour basher or someone who just wants Labour out of power? Well, I do want Labour out of power. Frankly, three terms is too much for any party. One term isn’t enough for the party to put into place its agenda. Two is just about right. The third term seems to be when the rot really sets in. They start to get too used to the power. So, yes, I want to see them go. I certainly don’t agree with Neil Harding that we should just vote blindly for a party to keep out the opposition. Indeed, such shallow, partisan thinking causes me to recoil. If a party’s policies are repugnant to me, I will not vote for them. If it is a party I have belonged to and supported, I will still not vote for them. I don’t do unthinking loyalty – my loyalty has to be earned.
I’ve lived under a Tory government; I could do so again. We really do need a change. I don’t hold out a great deal of hope that Cameron will be a shining beacon, but the current administration is well past its sell-by date.
One final point. Bob states that he is an individual.
…we are individuals after all.
Better not let the thought police find out… 😉
You raise some very interesting and salient points, particularly in respect of coalitions and PR. My objection has always been that the process which arrives at a Government following a hung parliament is usually much more undemocratic than the first-past-the-post system, which I accept is in itself fairly undemocratic. With coalition the negotiations take place away from the public gaze. Small elites of political leaders get together and swap about bits of their manifestos to such a degree no-one can account for who supported what, and the electorate are forgotten as people bargain for seats on the top table. That is what I despise about coalitions. In the case of the formation of the Labour Party in 1906, the negotiations took place before anyone was expected to join, or vote for the Labour Party.
On the Lib Dems, I don’t actually think that about them at all (or at least, not many of them), I just like winding up DoctorVee with his passion for all things Lib Dem. It works too, his lights start flashing straight away… three bells… jackpot! I actually get on quite well with the Lib Dems on our Council, they are the largely (about 75%) inoffensive yoghurt weaving types.
DoctorVee’s point, although I accept he may have been ‘tired and emotional’ at the time, was not that he would be prepared to suffer a Tory Government (obviously a boy with little experience of suffering) but that he would prefer a Conservative Government. He added that he welcomed Tory and Lib Dems getting together to get rid of Labour… all Labour, left or right.
I don’t have any difficulty with that, and people are welcome to do it. All I was suggesting in respect of Liberty Central, was that if it turned in to what MatGB originally called ‘Anyone But Labour’ before he hastily and sensibly retracted it after ‘consulting with others’, it would be without the support of those Labour members who agreed with Liberty Central’s concepts of civil liberties.
My view, for what it is worth Longrider, is that whether you ‘like’ me or not is of no consequence to me. The only thing that matters is, you are, as you say, my political enemy. As an ex-Party member you will undoubtedly appreciate, our task is to defeat our enemies. Unity, who has done so much admirable work on Liberty Central, is on the other hand, a comrade, not an enemy, and for that, and much else besides, he gets my respect.
Only drunk people can dislike Labour? Hmm.
Longrider replies: Bob, the point about “like” or “dislike” was simply to make the point that politics is not one dimensional. People will gather under a suitable banner for a given cause. The NO2ID crowd would normally disagree on just about everything, yet have for this one important issue put them aside for a single purpose.
I recall amicable relationships and exchanges with opposition party members during my time with the Labour party. What I have come to realise as my political experience matured, is that it was they, not I, who was right… :dry:
As I said, I cannot make any judgements about like or dislike – so neither applies and whether it is of consequence to you or not is equally irrelevant. I am not, however, your enemy. I simply have a different political opinion – one based upon bitter experience.