Turn on thread page Beta

The Counterintuitivity of Voting for the Green Party watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.theconversative.com/comme...e-green-party/

    According to this blog, if you are an environmentally concerned voter, the worst thing you can do is vote for the Green Party. What do we think?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    What do we think?
    theconversative.com is pushing its own agenda?

    Hardly a neutral piece.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    http://www.theconversative.com/comme...e-green-party/

    According to this blog, if you are an environmentally concerned voter, the worst thing you can do is vote for the Green Party. What do we think?
    (Original post by Quady)
    theconversative.com is pushing its own agenda rather?

    Hardly a neutral piece.
    Exactly what Quady said. Do you have another source, Teaddict?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    So true.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missfats)
    So true.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    UKIP voter?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    UKIP voter?
    Wouldn't vote for them.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missfats)
    Wouldn't vote for them.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Green voter?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Exactly what Quady said. Do you have another source, Teaddict?
    Well I think if you read the article you would realise that the sources are all academic journals. Indeed, the article on The Conversative is primarily highlighting what academics have argued.

    The success of the Green Party leading to a reduction in the salience of the environment is not original research by the blogger. It draws on research from academic literature and explains why it is the case, using other areas of academic literature. All of this is referenced to within the text.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Green voter?
    No way.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missfats)
    No way.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Hmmmmm must be Labour then...
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Well I think if you read the article you would realise that the sources are all academic journals. Indeed, the article on The Conversative is primarily highlighting what academics have argued.

    The success of the Green Party leading to a reduction in the salience of the environment is not original research by the blogger. It draws on research from academic literature and explains why it is the case, using other areas of academic literature. All of this is referenced to within the text.
    Well if a blogger has referenced an academic journal then it cannot possibly be supporting an agenda and nobody would refute it...

    I just don't see how the Greens are different to UKIP or the SNP do not see the same thing (apparently). Nor do I see how the Greens having had an MP has been a bad thing for the policy outcomes they pursue. Nor do I think Vote Blue, Go Green lasted past 2009.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Well if a blogger has referenced an academic journal then it cannot possibly be supporting an agenda and nobody would refute it...
    Perhaps people can read the article and judge for themselves, rather than say, "It's written by a conservative lalalalala I'm not listening"
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Exactly what Quady said. Do you have another source, Teaddict?
    Why don't you read the article and then respond? Otherwise you are simply demonstrating your own prejudice and bias, not that of the person who wrote the article
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    Perhaps people can read the article and judge for themselves, rather than say, "It's written by a conservative lalalalala I'm not listening"
    Sure they can.

    I did, and as the OP requested I provided my thoughts.

    It was the final paragraph that did it, the piece was written to support an agenda.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    http://www.theconversative.com/comme...e-green-party/

    According to this blog, if you are an environmentally concerned voter, the worst thing you can do is vote for the Green Party. What do we think?
    All of those complex words hide a very simple argument: "The more support the Green Party gets, the less likely mainstream parties are to recognise the environment as an important issue". It's not difficult to see why that's complete nonsense. Firstly, it's irrelevant - the leading political party has to bow down to social pressure. A good example of this is fracking - despite Cameron's love of fracking, the government have been unable to start a significant fracking operation in the UK because of environmentalist opposition. More and more environmental victories are being won through social movements rather than through the government - people have realised that their governments are incapable of standing up to polluting corporations so they are taking matters into their own hands. So even if that argument were true (which I don't think it is), it doesn't actually matter.

    Secondly, it's wrong. Whilst it might be true that mainstream parties will in the short term become more resistant to supporting environmentalist policies, if there's enough social pressure then they eventually won't have a choice. Thirdly, all of this assumes that the Green Party is never going to have any direct power in parliament. That is also not true - the more people that vote for them - obviously - the more likely they are to get MPs. Fourthly, the article completely ignores the importance of environmentalism and does not recognise the motivation behind Green Party supporters. People don't support environmental policies because it's a fad or because it's something they've discovered to get angry about, it's a profound feeling that the current system is destroying the habitability of the planet for us and future generations. We're not playing around with immigration figures or fractions of GDP percentages, we're playing around with the future of the planet. That's not something you can deal with through tactical voting. The current capitalist-driven system and a habitable and sustainable planet are mutually exclusive. People who recognise this aren't going to hedge their bets by listening to some bizarre article like this, they're going to vote for the party that promises the change we need.

    Finally, it is fairly obvious from the website name that this entire article has been built with the sole purpose of trying to stop being from voting for the Green Party and return to the mainstream. I'd hope that most people would be intelligent enough to realise what a stupid argument it makes.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by young_guns)
    Why don't you read the article and then respond? Otherwise you are simply demonstrating your own prejudice and bias, not that of the person who wrote the article
    Why do you assume I didn't read it? The article refers principally to one academic, not a range; therefore it already diminishes in reputable value. The gist of the article is that marginalised parties can't make a difference in the British political scene so voters might as well go with a party that will be able to achieve something rather than nothing, i.e. the Conservative Party. If that in itself wasn't enough to show it was a piece pushing the Tory agenda, then the final paragraph finished it off:

    As of 2005, the Conservative Party under the leadership of David Cameron has shown far more interest in the environment than the Labour Party. Indeed, it was Cameron’s desire to decontaminate the Conservative brand that led him to adopt the environment as an issue so strongly. In this sense then, if one is willing to tolerate centre-right approaches to other policy areas, perhaps the best vehicle for environmental improvement is the Conservative Party.
    You're asking me if I read the article, but I'm not sure you did.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Why do you assume I didn't read it? The article refers principally to one academic, not a range; therefore it already diminishes in reputable value
    I agree that the article is a load of ****e. Its conclusions were fatuous. Particularly, as you say, the last paragraph. It didn't even assess the degree to which the conservatives had actually adopted/accommodated green policies as opposed to branding themselves green

    But instead of simply pointing that out, you and Quady's first comments were simply to say, "It comes from a conservative publication". To me, that kind of tribal rejection of information is part of the reason politics is so ****ed up in this country.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by young_guns)
    I agree that the article is a load of ****e. Its conclusions were fatuous. Particularly, as you say, the last paragraph. It didn't even assess the degree to which the conservatives had actually adopted/accommodated green policies as opposed to branding themselves green

    But instead of simply pointing that out, you and Quady's first comments were simply to say, "It comes from a conservative publication". To me, that kind of tribal rejection of information is part of the reason politics is so ****ed up in this country.
    Well at least we agree on that then. :yy:

    You're right, I probably should have developed my original post more. However, it was clear from the onset that a website going by the name of 'theconservative' was hardly ever going to give an objective perspective of the situation. A source's reliability and neutrality is paramount to the strength of an argument.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Well at least we agree on that then. :yy:

    You're right, I probably should have developed my original post more. However, it was clear from the onset that a website going by the name of 'theconservative' was hardly ever going to give an objective perspective of the situation. A source's reliability and neutrality is paramount to the strength of an argument.
    This was my thoughts, its a lengthy blog and trying to argue against the content seemed somewhat pointless as its quite a personal hypothesis that was being put forward.

    But the last paragraph just demonstrates how much the peice has been constructed to try and convert votes. Perhaps should've referred to that but it didn't seem needed.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    But instead of simply pointing that out, you and Quady's first comments were simply to say, "It comes from a conservative publication". To me, that kind of tribal rejection of information is part of the reason politics is so ****ed up in this country.
    My second sentence indicated I read it, at 23:41 I was being too lazy to say more.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 23, 2015
Poll
Favourite type of bread
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.