The Reform Party and the UK’s lurch towards fascism

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #32683
    David9694

    I posted an earlier version of this a while back – inspired to do update following THAT discussion about all things ULEZ. 

    The “manifesto”, in terms of transport, only mentions stopping HS2, but there’s plenty on the usual right-wing obsessions: Brexit, immigration, veterans and climate change.  I had another look because I worry about the ongoing decline of the two main political parties. 

    If the Cons stay wedded to Brexit, then we will go into the next GE with all the widespread impoverishment Brexit has ushered in – not helped by Covid, Putin, etc. People generally vote according to their pockets.  I don’t get Labour’s current position on Europe either, but let’s see how that evolves, and even the Cons may also evolve, or even pivot, but time is already running out for them.

    Several roads now lead to the horrors of a further lurch to the right in this country.  Let’s hope Labour get the GE landslide the polls are predicting – but we’re still at least a year out from the real campaigning beginning. 

    A cycling angle? With the Reform Party and its ilk, Facebook Steve and Nextdoor Dave attain real political influence. It’s not spelt out in the manifesto, but you can see where this is probably heading and what it is likely to mean for cycling.  You can bet that this lot are very much “on the side of hard working drivers” etc. 

    As you all know, Dave’s going to “sort the traffic” and no doubt show them lazy planners how it’s done: Steve thinks the Council are corrupt, the police blinkered and is, if he can fit it in to his busy schedule he’s going to “teach them Lycra’s a thing or two.” It won’t concern him that his Mondeo is 3 months out of MoT or that Mrs Steve sometimes drives the kids in it uninsured. 

    As vulnerable road users, vulnerable people, we rely a great deal on the rule of law for protection. The rule of law means that we understand what the laws are, they are in general fair, and how they are applied and to whom is even-handed and consistent. 

    The fascist position is broadly the opposite – it’s all off-the-cuff to support today’s particular agenda – that’s why the Iain Duncan-Smith “happy to see ULEZ infra vandalised” comment is, as an example, so very worrying.  In the Conservatives, here is a party happy to send signals to enable the mob to attack RNLI stations, beat up immigrants, shout at teachers, doctors etc. 

    This right-wing stuff works by allowing/enabling significant privileged groups to to think of themselves as the downtrodden underdog and here is a way to fight back.  The pro Brexit campaign played on people’s ignorance, fears and prejudices exactly as this does. 

    It’s all about freedom, innit, less regulation, less tax burden, and damn the climate.  There’s more polar bears now, so it’s fine.  Let’s have open-cast coal mining, lithium mining and fracking. The section on climate change stumbles around like a Friday night drunk, trying to explain he wasn’t being racist to the barman – a denier position emerges, unsurprisingly.

    In places, the mask really slips: “We must keep divisive woke ideologies such as Critical Race Theory (CRT) and gender ideology out of the classroom.” – to be honest, I don’t even know what those two are.

    The standard enemies are put up – the civil service, the BBC.  Amid all the thrust and parry, there’s nothing  about making a better, more inclusive and cohesive world to live in; arts, sports and culture don’t feature in this barstool view of the world: a dullard’s grim vision.

    Don’t be a member of the wrong sort of minority would be my advice, should any of this come to pass. 
     

    https://www.reformparty.uk/reformisessential

Viewing 15 replies - 721 through 735 (of 891 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #1016689
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    The Greens are also keen on attracting that particular demographic. https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/at-least-three-green-party-candidates-dropped-over-inappropriate-comments-amid-antisemitism-row-a3otuqoh%5B/quote%5D

    If by “keen” you mean immediately dropping those candidates and not letting them stand for the Greens, then sure, they’re really aiming to attract them.

    Meanwhile, we have the Tories doing stuff like this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/18/tory-candidate-accused-of-dog-whistle-tactics-against-rival-with-indian-name

    [quote]

    A Conservative candidate has been criticised for sending letters to British-Pakistani voters allegedly insinuating they should vote for him instead of his Labour rival because of her Indian surname.

    Marco Longhi, the Tory candidate fighting for re-election in Dudley North against Sonia Kumar, has been accused of using dog-whistle politics and attempting to “alienate British Hindus”.

    In a letter to “voters of the British Pakistani/Kashmiri community in Dudley”, Longhi asked if the Labour candidate would speak for Kashmir in parliament. Kumar’s name was in bold, capitalised and underlined.

    Rishi Sunak has been called to withdraw his support for Longhi and condemn the letter.

    #1016687
    0
    Rich_cb

    The Greens are also keen on
    The Greens are also keen on attracting that particular demographic.

    https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/at-least-three-green-party-candidates-dropped-over-inappropriate-comments-amid-antisemitism-row-a3otuqoh

    #1016685
    0
    Rich_cb

    Voting on strategies.
    Voting on strategies.

    Sounds like a referendum to me.

    Careful with those, occasionally people don’t vote the way you want them to.

    #1016683
    0
    chrisonabike
    wycombewheeler wrote:
    hawkinspeter wrote:
    Then they’ll probably pick an out-group to blame everything on and will try to send them packing on planes to Rwanda or something.

    If we’re all being sent to rwanda, I need to know are the roads any good, or do I need a gravel bike?

    A buffalo bike might be a good transport choice – rugged, simple, suitable for local maintenance.  Plus a good technology transfer example as uses pretty widely available standard parts and a detailed manual is freely available etc.

    You might spot some Elephant bikes out there although I think they went to Malawi.

    #1016681
    0
    David9694

    Principally the voters. 

    Principally the voters. 

    For candidates – strange views on women, childcare, population, says things like “old Hitler had the right idea”, wants their country back (but can’t describe what if anything that means) probably thinks a clip ’round the ear will sort most problems. Jaguar driver. 

    #1016679
    0
    the little onion

    democracy is not dictatorship

    democracy is not dictatorship by majority. It’s not limited to just a vote.

    #1016677
    0
    mdavidford
    wycombewheeler wrote:
    hawkinspeter wrote:
    Then they’ll probably pick an out-group to blame everything on and will try to send them packing on planes to Rwanda or something.

    If we’re all being sent to rwanda, I need to know are the roads any good, or do I need a gravel bike?

    Looks like a gravel bike might be advisable for maximum enjoyment, although they are driving the growth of African professional road cycling.

    #1016675
    0
    chrisonabike

    Indeed. Their main role is to
    Indeed. Their main role is to *represent* a given constituency in Westminster.

    #1016673
    0
    wycombewheeler
    hawkinspeter wrote:
    Then they’ll probably pick an out-group to blame everything on and will try to send them packing on planes to Rwanda or something.

    If we’re all being sent to rwanda, I need to know are the roads any good, or do I need a gravel bike?

    #1016671
    0
    mdavidford
    Bungle_52 wrote:
    Just to say that in theory we do not vote for parties, we vote for a single mp who is supposed to represent the views of the constituents in parliament. This means that the mp should canvas opinions before every vote to ascertain what the views of the constituents are.

    That’s not quite how it’s supposed to work. We’re supposed to vote for the person who we think would make the best decisions on our behalf, which is a subtle but important difference. It doesn’t entail that they should vote in accordance with the way a majority of constituents would, since the majority can make bad decisions, whether through a lack of information/understanding of the issue, or because, in some contexts and on some issues, we’re all quite bad at making decisions.

    #1016669
    0
    wycombewheeler
    David9694 wrote:
    The talentless, jumped-up and dissatisfied are the key demographic.
     

    are you talking about reform candidates or reform voters now?

    #1016667
    0
    wycombewheeler
    Bungle_52 wrote:
    This means that the mp should canvas opinions before every vote to ascertain what the views of the constituents are.

    Yes, there were a lot of MPs denounced for voting against brexit, but much silence on those that voted for, against the wishes of their constituents.

    #1016665
    0
    Bungle_52
    peted76 wrote:
    It’s a shame that, us the people, are corralled and cajoled into making decisions based on highly emotive subjects and we’re simply not presented with a bunch of facts and figures and options, I mean why can’t we vote on strategies and not  for parties. The idelogical standpoints of cons/labs/libs/greens are simply not there any more..  Why are we forced into voting for one party when we should be voting for the best and brightest strategies and ideas to move gov.uk forward. Why don’t the government engage with us like adults instead of children? Why do we allow them to engage with us like this? (answer because for most of us, there isn’t a lever to change it)

    Just to say that in theory we do not vote for parties, we vote for a single mp who is supposed to represent the views of the constituents in parliament. This means that the mp should canvas opinions before every vote to ascertain what the views of the constituents are. This never happens and is a huge problem with the current system. Instead the mp votes on the basis of their own views or, most of the time, the views of the lobbyists who grease their party’s palms the most.

    As for the rest of your comments, it seems to me the idea of voting on strategies rather than parties is a good one. I believe this is what happens to some extent  in Switzerland with referenda on important issues. Another possible solution is to accept the party system but change to PR to elect them.

    #1016663
    0
    Rendel Harris
    ErnieC wrote:
    And the will of the majority will prevail, democracy in action whether you like the result or not. 

    The will of the majority virtually never prevails: the last time more than 50% of voters chose one party in the UK was 1935 (you could say that the LibCon coalition of 2010, with over 50% of the vote between them, was “the will of the people” but that would make the erroneous supposition that all LD voters were happy with the decision to enter coalition with the Tories). Under our ridiculous and outdated parliamentary system, the will of the largest minority will prevail and the majority of the votes cast will essentially count for nothing. Not really democracy in action.

    #1016661
    0
    ErnieC

    And the will of the majority

    And the will of the majority will prevail, democracy in action whether you like the result or not. 

Viewing 15 replies - 721 through 735 (of 891 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.