Quite analogous to Australia, despite significant electoral system differences. A formerly workers party leaning as right as possible, in ways that would make its founders blush, led by an insipid political animal who once professed progressive values. All increasingly on the nose with younger voters who understand that their needs for housing, job security and a safe climate are irrelevant.
Honestly the kids ought to be angrier than they are - and they're already mighty pissed off.
I wouldn’t right off the Conservatives just yet, the born to rule mob don’t give up without a fight. Somehow like neoliberalism and the poor, they always seem to be with us.I feel 12 is a bit young for voting. However If you can leave school at 15 and work, you should be entitled to a vote.
At the expense of my own disenfranchisement, one wonders whether people over 70 should be allowed to vote at all. (But young people should - how about 16?)
I have long argued that all young people should be allowed to vote, with help from their parents if needed and desired. But on the basis of having at least as much understanding of the world as 70+, I'd settle for 12 as the voting age.
I wish we could at least ACKNOWLEDGE they have more skin in the game. This absolutely infuriates people over 65, who sometimes seem to be believe their interests are the most pressing.
Political party forecasting is a minefield. Often one party wins an election simply because the alternate choice is so repugnant to voters who turn up to cast a valid vote. The current state of politics seems to produce two main parties equally objectionable to a large part of the voter age population. There are no stand out parties. Each of the main parties tries to capture the middle ground of politics. But that can leave its extreme left and right wing supporters disgruntled. Opportunist parties then try to poach those voters. The number of candidates standing for ejection is a symptom of this voter uncertainty.
I for one would not like to predict a long future for any government. More likely is that uncertainty will remain and the major parties that are voted in will then be voted out of office in the short term.
As Plato once said about democracy, it is usually very messy.
Perhaps this is a critique of our flawed democracies, but I'm not at all convinced that these failed ideologies are facing extinction-scale crises. I suspect that like cockroaches, they'll re-emerge again to set us up for another failure. The only way I can see to solve this is to implement genuinely democratic systemic reforms - for example a citizen's assembly in Australia. Otherwise we risk the cycle repeating until an autocrat comes along and steals power from deeply dissatisfied people.
However, while watching the demise of the right - like a slowly decaying iceburg lettuce - is morbidly entertaining, it feels distorted that we've been trained by our media to remain hyper-focused on the electoral prospects of the right. "Oh my dog, how will the Liberals survive this?" Who cares? I'm already convinced they're ideologically irrelevant, so I'd much prefer to have a discussion about the varying merits of all the other ideas which might take their place.
On the voting age question that is being discussed here, that's easy - make it lower. It's not like the Republic question where people differ on what the solution should be. My own preference is a voluntary opt-in to the electoral role from 14-18 years, compulsory voting for those who do opt-in, and compulsory voting remaining for all at 18. This gives youth an open invitation to participate if they would like to, and an opportunity to discuss what this means in civics class, but no obligation. Ultimately for me - I'll go with whichever lower voting system that can get endorsed. John's 12+ comment would be perfectly agreeable for me.
When compared with the demented utterances of the likes of Trump and MJT, 12 year olds are streets ahead and obviously more able to make a considered choice.
Is there any history of parties being "destroyed" in England? In the US you have to go back to the Whigs. Does the Conservative Party have the belly to engage in the type of ratfucking the Republican Party relies on to hold onto power? Doubling down on extremism has worked for the Republican Party only with the help of a propaganda network backed by billionaires and shameless manipulation of "norms", plus the aforementioned ratfucking. If Tories are not up for that, is there another path forward without a massive housecleaning?
The Liberal party went quite quickly from political dominance to being an unimportant third party after 1914. They still exist as the LibDems, but their one stint in government in the last century (2010-15) was a disaster
The Tories could evolve into flying, feathered reptiles. So remember the trilobites!
Quite analogous to Australia, despite significant electoral system differences. A formerly workers party leaning as right as possible, in ways that would make its founders blush, led by an insipid political animal who once professed progressive values. All increasingly on the nose with younger voters who understand that their needs for housing, job security and a safe climate are irrelevant.
Honestly the kids ought to be angrier than they are - and they're already mighty pissed off.
I wouldn’t right off the Conservatives just yet, the born to rule mob don’t give up without a fight. Somehow like neoliberalism and the poor, they always seem to be with us.I feel 12 is a bit young for voting. However If you can leave school at 15 and work, you should be entitled to a vote.
Is there a word missing from the phrase "a piece nostalgia politics"? Should it be "a piece <I>of</I> nostalgia politics" or something?
Fixed now, thanks
Fixed now, thanks
At the expense of my own disenfranchisement, one wonders whether people over 70 should be allowed to vote at all. (But young people should - how about 16?)
I have long argued that all young people should be allowed to vote, with help from their parents if needed and desired. But on the basis of having at least as much understanding of the world as 70+, I'd settle for 12 as the voting age.
I wish we could at least ACKNOWLEDGE they have more skin in the game. This absolutely infuriates people over 65, who sometimes seem to be believe their interests are the most pressing.
Political party forecasting is a minefield. Often one party wins an election simply because the alternate choice is so repugnant to voters who turn up to cast a valid vote. The current state of politics seems to produce two main parties equally objectionable to a large part of the voter age population. There are no stand out parties. Each of the main parties tries to capture the middle ground of politics. But that can leave its extreme left and right wing supporters disgruntled. Opportunist parties then try to poach those voters. The number of candidates standing for ejection is a symptom of this voter uncertainty.
I for one would not like to predict a long future for any government. More likely is that uncertainty will remain and the major parties that are voted in will then be voted out of office in the short term.
As Plato once said about democracy, it is usually very messy.
Thanks John.
Perhaps this is a critique of our flawed democracies, but I'm not at all convinced that these failed ideologies are facing extinction-scale crises. I suspect that like cockroaches, they'll re-emerge again to set us up for another failure. The only way I can see to solve this is to implement genuinely democratic systemic reforms - for example a citizen's assembly in Australia. Otherwise we risk the cycle repeating until an autocrat comes along and steals power from deeply dissatisfied people.
However, while watching the demise of the right - like a slowly decaying iceburg lettuce - is morbidly entertaining, it feels distorted that we've been trained by our media to remain hyper-focused on the electoral prospects of the right. "Oh my dog, how will the Liberals survive this?" Who cares? I'm already convinced they're ideologically irrelevant, so I'd much prefer to have a discussion about the varying merits of all the other ideas which might take their place.
On the voting age question that is being discussed here, that's easy - make it lower. It's not like the Republic question where people differ on what the solution should be. My own preference is a voluntary opt-in to the electoral role from 14-18 years, compulsory voting for those who do opt-in, and compulsory voting remaining for all at 18. This gives youth an open invitation to participate if they would like to, and an opportunity to discuss what this means in civics class, but no obligation. Ultimately for me - I'll go with whichever lower voting system that can get endorsed. John's 12+ comment would be perfectly agreeable for me.
When compared with the demented utterances of the likes of Trump and MJT, 12 year olds are streets ahead and obviously more able to make a considered choice.
Is there any history of parties being "destroyed" in England? In the US you have to go back to the Whigs. Does the Conservative Party have the belly to engage in the type of ratfucking the Republican Party relies on to hold onto power? Doubling down on extremism has worked for the Republican Party only with the help of a propaganda network backed by billionaires and shameless manipulation of "norms", plus the aforementioned ratfucking. If Tories are not up for that, is there another path forward without a massive housecleaning?
The Liberal party went quite quickly from political dominance to being an unimportant third party after 1914. They still exist as the LibDems, but their one stint in government in the last century (2010-15) was a disaster