Does the state of British politics show that we need new electoral system? Watch

gaywasp
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#1
One of the major advantages of having a more liberal electoral system is that it allows for third parties to gain a stronger foothold in government and parliament.

The UK didn't see a strong surge in electoral support for any far-right party because the electoral system in the UK discourages people from voting for any party other that the major two.

Not only does the UK share most of the social problems that a causing the 'swing to the far right' in Continental Europe, but also the UK has to deal with troublesome race relations between Muslims and Non-Muslims too.

http://policy.bristoluniversitypress...m-and-criminal

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crime-Muslim.../dp/1845118332

http://pertinentproblems.com/2017/07...ethnic-groups/
0
reply
username1221160
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 months ago
#2
You're right in your criticism of our first past the post system.

But that didn't stop more than 0.5 million people voting BNP in 2010. They collapsed and no far right group has stepped up to take their place. The far right would rather hurl abuse at people outside takeaways or throw bacon at mosques. Until they are willing to organise themselves and display some modicum of competence, they will not be a viable electoral force, irrespective of our voting system.
5
reply
Harriso1
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 months ago
#3
Electoral system eliminates the radicals which is good for stability. Produces two party system, single government which is typically efficient. FPTP means there would have to be an overwhelming political shift among the public for new parties to emerge with a significant amount of seats which is a positive. You can't give the public too much power (i.e. More/wholly representative systems) otherwise we would have radical left/right in the commons with a minority government. What I'm saying is not everyone can be trusted to make the decisions that affect society but we have no right to take that power away so simply limit the overall damage if you get me. Misinformed people vote for the far right and far left (they aren't all misinformed) but for a massive political shift, the legitimacy and integrity of such parties would be strained.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
1
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 months ago
#4
We had a referendum on a different electoral system in 2010ish. There was a resounding vote to keep things as they are. I think one of the problems in politics right now is that there is so much hatred and vitriol aimed at our politicians that one has to wonder who would want to be a politician. And the answer is - certainly not the best people for the job.

I think we are entering an era of career politicians that are all image and little substance.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 months ago
#5
(Original post by Sulfolobus)
You're right in your criticism of our first past the post system.

But that didn't stop more than 0.5 million people voting BNP in 2010. They collapsed and no far right group has stepped up to take their place. The far right would rather hurl abuse at people outside takeaways or throw bacon at mosques. Until they are willing to organise themselves and display some modicum of competence, they will not be a viable electoral force, irrespective of our voting system.
It’s not quite as simple as just incompetence that is the reason why the ‘far right’ and also the far left have not gotten very far in U.K. politics.

First of all they are up against an establishment that wants to quite understandably protect its interests to beat them using means both fair and foul- constant media attacks, undercover operatives infiltrating and sabotaging parties, attacking funding etc.

A libertarian author with links to the Alt right was fired from his job and his subsequent go fund me page was shut down.

Theres is also the fact that in order to effect change in the U.K.(and the US) you need to work through the current system - see both Trump and Corbyn. So long as democracy is allowed the grass roots will generally favour the ‘populist’ candidate. But certain parties such as the Tories and Democrats have rigged systems to make sure that establishment politicians are chosen by vested interests rather than party membership.

The SNP surge was able to overcome this I reckon by dint of its devolved parliament and already established electoral base. The Greens and Ukip do not have this luxury.
0
reply
bob072
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 months ago
#6
(Original post by gaywasp)
One of the major advantages of having a more liberal electoral system is that it allows for third parties to gain a stronger foothold in government and parliament.

The UK didn't see a strong surge in electoral support for any far-right party because the electoral system in the UK discourages people from voting for any party other that the major two.

Not only does the UK share most of the social problems that a causing the 'swing to the far right' in Continental Europe, but also the UK has to deal with troublesome race relations between Muslims and Non-Muslims too.

http://policy.bristoluniversitypress...m-and-criminal

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crime-Muslim.../dp/1845118332

http://pertinentproblems.com/2017/07...ethnic-groups/
The British public are incredibly tolerant and detest all extremism. I don't believe a far-right party would ever get more than 5% which is normally the threshold to gain seats under PR.

But if you believe in democracy, we shouldn't skew the system in favour of the status quo because we're scared of the people's decisions.
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 months ago
#7
(Original post by ByEeek)
We had a referendum on a different electoral system in 2010ish. There was a resounding vote to keep things as they are. I think one of the problems in politics right now is that there is so much hatred and vitriol aimed at our politicians that one has to wonder who would want to be a politician. And the answer is - certainly not the best people for the job.

I think we are entering an era of career politicians that are all image and little substance.
I think it was 2011. A (Not so) interesting fact about that. Cameron was campaigning against AV, even though the system won him the Conservative leadership in 2005, if that had used FPTP he would not have won.
0
reply
enlimaa
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 months ago
#8
very few countries still use FPTP bc its obvious problems. think STV system would be best
0
reply
Joleee
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 18
#9
Report 7 months ago
#9
first-past-the-post system is terrible. it's especially bad in Canada where most people live east of Toronto. by the time you get west of that the election is over - your vote doesn't count anymore.

it's unfortunate the UK voted against election reform in 2011. i don't know the issues, i wasn't there; but wtf were you thinking?
reply
enlimaa
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 months ago
#10
(Original post by Joleee)
first-past-the-post system is terrible. it's especially bad in Canada where most people live east of Toronto. by the time you get west of that the election is over - your vote doesn't count anymore.

it's unfortunate the UK voted against election reform in 2011. i don't know the issues, i wasn't there; but wtf were you thinking?
the AV system being proposed was not good, but some people advocating electoral reform voted for it anyway bc it could lead to further reform to a proportional system
0
reply
Joleee
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 18
#11
Report 7 months ago
#11
(Original post by enlimaa)
the AV system being proposed was not good, but some people advocating electoral reform voted for it anyway bc it could lead to further reform to a proportional system
what could be worse than FPTP? :confused:
reply
username1221160
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 months ago
#12
(Original post by Davij038)
First of all they are up against an establishment that wants to quite understandably protect its interests to beat them using means both fair and foul- constant media attacks,
I have no problem with the media giving any individual a hard time for expressing far right political views, Islamist views, or other views that are antithetical to British values.

undercover operatives infiltrating and sabotaging parties,
Given the history of violence associated with the far right and their tendency to commit criminal acts, this seems justified and should be encouraged.

attacking funding etc.
Key to the collapse of the BNP was dodgy/corrupt finances. The attacks towards Nick Griffin came from within his party.

A libertarian author with links to the Alt right was fired from his job and his subsequent go fund me page was shut down.
I'm not aware of the case you are referring to but I don't consider libertarianism to be a far right ideology. Additionally, a company is free to hire and fire who they wish )within employment law). To argue otherwise is distinctly anti-libertarian.

Theres is also the fact that in order to effect change in the U.K.(and the US) you need to work through the current system - see both Trump and Corbyn. So long as democracy is allowed the grass roots will generally favour the ‘populist’ candidate. But certain parties such as the Tories and Democrats have rigged systems to make sure that establishment politicians are chosen by vested interests rather than party membership.

The SNP surge was able to overcome this I reckon by dint of its devolved parliament and already established electoral base. The Greens and Ukip do not have this luxury.
Which is why I would prefer proportional representation.

But the far right are not even trying. For example, Britain First liked to boast that had 1 million followers on Facebook but they have hardly bothered to enter candidates into elections since they registered as a political party in 2014.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 months ago
#13
Sulfolobus

Well yeah, that rather proves my point. Britain First standing in for elections would have damaged ukips vote. Similar groups should echo the left in having pressure groups in place to protect allies and exert pressure on enemies such as what TusC etc are doing with labour and Jeremy Corbyn.

Britain first are also from poor WWC background, who can be at times easy to ridicule (cue drunk white skin head talking about about ‘muslamics’). But you can poor idiots in any political ideology. Some of the dumbest people I’ve met have been over ‘educated’ corbynistas who couldn’t an egg.

But when you do get attempts to say professionalise or broaden the alt rights appeal these people are fired from their lucrative corporate careers- eg Mike Enoch used to be a wealthy web developer before being doxxed and his employer firing him for wrong-think.

The guy I referred to is called Christopher chase Rachel’s who I believe argued that from a libertarian perspective if white businesses wanted to discriminate against minorities or vice versus then this should be allowed.

By the way, I’m not saying that these companies shouldnt have the right to sack these people, just thst there’s a lot of good reasons why they haven’t been that effective at mobilisation, in addition to ideological spats and personality clashes.
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 months ago
#14
Only since we voted for meltdown.
0
reply
RF_PineMarten
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 months ago
#15
(Original post by Harriso1)
Electoral system eliminates the radicals which is good for stability. Produces two party system, single government which is typically efficient. FPTP means there would have to be an overwhelming political shift among the public for new parties to emerge with a significant amount of seats which is a positive. You can't give the public too much power (i.e. More/wholly representative systems) otherwise we would have radical left/right in the commons with a minority government.
Two party system may be good for stability (debatable), but it's absolutely awful for democratic accountability, which is the whole point of having elections in the first place.

It doesn't eliminate radicals, it eliminates any new political movement unless the popular support is overwhelming. Which is just completely wrong no matter how you try to spin it. It actively stands in the way of political progress.

A movement which is growing and gets 10, 15 or 20% of the vote nationally should get some seats for it so that view is represented in parliament to the extent it deserves. Not totally excluded as is so often the case under FPTP.
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 months ago
#16
What rubbish... our electoral system is the envy of the world.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 months ago
#17
(Original post by bob072)
The British public are incredibly tolerant and detest all extremism. I don't believe a far-right party would ever get more than 5% which is normally the threshold to gain seats under PR.
Extremist and far right are subjective and pejorative terms. People think Trump is literally Hitler.

Somebody with ‘far Right’ views would probably do very well electorally if they had a realistic chance of gaining power. Look across the West- it’s hsppening everywhere/ even Sweden! The establishment are terrified because the ‘extreme’ positions are popular hence the derivative ‘populist’.

When the piblic had had the chance to vote on the matter, they chose- albeit closely to vote for the ‘extreme’ position of brexit and nationalism.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 months ago
#18
(Original post by ByEeek)
I think we are entering an era of career politicians that are all image and little substance.
I think you’re a bit behind the times mate. Authenticity is popular now this is why people like Trump and Corbyn, (who love or loathe them are at least authentic) are in power as populist breaks from establishment systems, which is why they are both attacked and demonised so much. Trump for going against the orthodoxy on immigration and PC culture and Corbyn for going against the orthodoxy on endless foreign wars and neoliberal economics.

combine the two and you’ve got basically national socialism.
0
reply
bob072
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 months ago
#19
(Original post by Davij038)
Extremist and far right are subjective and pejorative terms. People think Trump is literally Hitler.

Somebody with ‘far Right’ views would probably do very well electorally if they had a realistic chance of gaining power. Look across the West- it’s hsppening everywhere/ even Sweden! The establishment are terrified because the ‘extreme’ positions are popular hence the derivative ‘populist’.

When the piblic had had the chance to vote on the matter, they chose- albeit closely to vote for the ‘extreme’ position of brexit and nationalism.
Yes, but brexit is just making us like the other 180 normal countries and is supported by a majority from all political stances so can't be extreme.

I understand the confusion because some people like to class anyone with different views as far right to shut them down because they're scared they would lose in a debate.

The genuine far-right (BNP and National Front) always lose the debate when their views are exposed and currently have no support or elected representatives.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 months ago
#20
(Original post by bob072)
Yes, but brexit is just making us like the other 180 normal countries and is supported by a majority from all political stances so can't be extreme.

I understand the confusion because some people like to class anyone with different views as far right to shut them down because they're scared they would lose in a debate.

The genuine far-right (BNP and National Front) always lose the debate when their views are exposed and currently have no support or elected representatives.
There is a moderate centre right argument to be made for brexit based on sovereignty and free trade agreements. It’s complete garbage though. The majority of votes came from WWC class traditional labour voters who were anti immigration- these are basically people who would be called far right by the MSM.

...Genuine far-right groups encounter the problems I have addressed as above. but they’ve gotten rise to it now- see the success of Europe and in particular the work of Steve Bannon.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (95)
16.64%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (60)
10.51%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (100)
17.51%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (86)
15.06%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (57)
9.98%
How can I be the best version of myself? (173)
30.3%

Watched Threads

View All