BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Switchboard >

What's the alternative to voting New Labour at the general election?

  
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:55 / 31.01.05
Another tangent: I didn't think it was worth starting a new thread for, but it makes me so irritated: An interview with the guy doing Labour's advertising. This link will probably become pay-only in a day or two, the pertinent section is this:

Beattie identifies one trait in voting intentions that he considers disturbing. "It's what I call the party of one," he says, "where voters have started wanting from politics what they get from everything else in their modern lives. If they have Sky, they want Sky News, Sky Sports 1, but not Sky Sports 3; the movie package but not Film 4. They want the same from a political party, and I think that's unfair. They say - I want a political party that agrees with me on Europe, on immigration, taxation, international affairs, the environment, and if you disagree with me on any of those five points I'm not voting for you. Well, grow up a bit. Because you need a party that appeals to the masses, not the one. And Labour is for the many, not the few."
 
 
Tryphena Absent
10:12 / 31.01.05
want a political party that agrees with me on Europe, on immigration, taxation, international affairs, the environment

So Beattie, what do you do when you think the Labour party is screwing up interntaional affairs, immigration, the environment and you want to punch the Education Secretary in the face because she's talking about nothing?

No, I don't think he's convinced me.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
12:15 / 31.01.05
Well exactly. An alternative might be "So, I might believe, were I religious, that The War Against Terror was against my religion, that operations which New Labour supported contravened every international law we have and that Tony Blair misled the British people and Parliament and should be indicted as a war criminal for Iraq. But, I should still vote Labour because their tax policy is slightly more sane than that of the Conservatives and we agree on Europe? Fuck right off!"
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
11:05 / 06.02.05
Strategic Voter 2005. Based on current polls it suggested the seat could swing to the Tories which I just could not bring myself to do...
 
 
Alex's Grandma
19:03 / 06.02.05
Well grow up a bit

Being told to do this by the fab ad genius responsible for the FCUK logo is... well it's totally New Labour, I suppose.

I think anything, even voting Conservative, is justifiable if it goes towards reducing Blair's majority next time round. Even assuming, worst case scenario, that Michael Howard was to end up in Number 10 after the election, I can't help feeling he'd be so shocked himself that he wouldn't be able to do anything at all for at least a couple of years, which given that both main parties seem to be about to go to the country on the back of what's, in effect, a race hate campaign ( 'slyum seekers, etc, ) would only be a good thing.

What is New Labour's problem, for George Morrison's sake ? They must know that barring an act of outrageous improbability they're going to sail back into office for an historic third term, and that consequently they've got an opportunity to lay out a genuinely progessive, liberal, humanist ( and all those other dirty words that 'we' don't believe in any more, ) agenda. And yet what are they actually proposing ? That cripples, literally, have to be kicked, that darkies, pikies and sand bunnies have to be kept off British soil at all costs, even if, courtesy of us, their home states have been bombed half to death, and that Michael Howard is an untrustworthy jew. And that, at least so far, would appear to be it.

It's really not just a question of political pragmatism, is it ? Blair's 'Big Idea' for his hstrc thrd trm is that he simply, quite blatantly and embarassingly obviously, does not have one. Anyone with the slightest shred of integrity would, in his position, have resigned at least six months ago.

And on a separate note, having gone through today's papers ( Obs, Mirror, Telegraph, ) why is Kate Moss going out with that guy from The Libertines ? I'm as up in arms as the next man.
 
 
Not Here Still
14:02 / 12.02.05
I've read the Harris book now - pretty easy reading actually, and well worth it. His basic conclkusion is similar to the one I put on the l;ast page, ie: vote locally, scare Blair if you can but don't let the Tories back in. Harris agrees with an unnamed Labour ex-minister who says Blair needs a shock to make him re-assess his prtiorities (my money was on Peter Kilfoyle, but he actually got interviewed on record a few pages later, so God knows...)

On which point, OPB Alex is Losing His Edge:

I think anything even voting Conservative, is justifiable if it goes towards reducing Blair's majority next time round.

I know what you're saying, but two points:

1; I remember the Thatcher years and I know how much they shaped my view on the world, mainly through hatred of the Conservative party. I am never going to vote Tory, and Howard was a bastard when he was in Government, is a bastard now, and if he gets into Number 10, will still be a bastard. The question is, will he be a bigger bastard than Blair, and I think I already know the answer.

and

2: Dangerous turn of phrase, "anything is justifiable", surely?

Try telling that to voters where a BNP candidate is standing.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
16:39 / 12.02.05
But it'd be fine, because the BNP candidate's victory would be so unexpected that ze'd be in a state of shock for 24 months, and so incapable of doing anything worse than Labour.

Not the most convincing 'worst case scenario/rock and a hard place' argument I've ever heard.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
16:17 / 14.02.05
I cannot in good conscience vote Tory, the current leader of the Conservative party is responsible, apart from everything else, for a policy designed to tell children like I was when this was brought in, that we were scum. I will not lay down with the beast. (Although the Beast, hmmm...)
 
 
Spaniel
13:52 / 15.02.05
If you're in a constituency where the Tories or similar (or worse!) have a chance of getting in, voting for them would be pretty unforgiveable. I mean, I want to send our Tone a message as much as the next man, but I don't want to send Michael Howard a love letter in the bloody process.
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
10:32 / 16.02.05
I've got a rebellious Labour back bencher as my MP, with a very safe seat, so voting against them is not going to achieve a lot. But there just still is that part of me that wants not to vote Labour this time. If enough people voted Lib Dem it might knock the Conservatives to third place in the constituency. I can't decide if this is worth it or not given that without proportional representation it doesn't really matter who comes second?

My MP voted against the war, foundation Hospitals, and overall in a way which is mostly consistent with how I would want them to vote. I'd like to think that it would send a message to Labour by keeping those rebellious backbenchers in their seats with large majorities, but I think this is unlikely.

As for voting Tory, never going to happen, even to reduce a Labour majority.
 
 
Axolotl
10:48 / 16.02.05
I don't think I could bring myself to vote tory, at least not while they remain the party of evil bigots. I'm finding it harder and harder to motivate myself to vote in this election as all the major parties are equally uninspiring and obssessed with kow-towing to the lowest common denominator. It's things like none of them standing up and kicking up a fuss about Charles Clarke and his plans to suspend the rules of law that really gets me angry. Thus I will probably go along to the polls, pick my minority party with no hope of being elected and vote for them. Having said that I need to familiarise myself with scottish politics before I decide who to vote for.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
11:14 / 16.02.05
it doesn't really matter who comes second?

In the long term, on a nationwide basis, it does- I'll be voting LibDem (I know I've said this already but given my propensity for changing my mind I thought I'd point out that I haven't this time) primarily because they need to become the official opposition. (Without opposition there's no democracy and all that stuff I keep repeating). The Tories are fucked for the foreseeable- and they and New Labour seem preoccupied with dragging each other further to the right, which can only be a bad thing, as far as I can tell.
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
11:40 / 16.02.05
I defintely agree Stoatie, that nationally it matters who comes second, and I for one would just love to see the Lib Dems become the major opposition, though I'm not sure I agree with some of their policies, just far more than I agree with anything the Tories say.

I was more talking about it not mattering locally, but I should follow your lead (especially given that I think we are in the same contituency) and vote for the Lib Dems, as it would be satisfying to see the Tories knocked down to third place, it is just frustrating to not be having more of an effect on Labour this time I guess, I'll just have to leave that to people who can.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:47 / 17.02.05
The thing I worry about with the Lib Dems is that they've had so much opportunity to pin down the Labour party over the past 18 months and I haven't seen them do so effectively. I'm not sure if that's because they're failing to do so or if they're managing it in parliament but nobody's talking about it. Certainly in interviews they always pace slowly instead of jumping on the negative points. And most of those negative points revolved around emotive issues and weren't simple squabbling points.
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
10:04 / 17.02.05
I do think that sometimes they are just not taken seriously and do not get the press coverage that the other two parties receive.

But I also worry that in order to make themselves more appealing to swing voters (particularly given that if they are to take seats at the next election it is largely going to have to be by taking Tory seats not Labour ones) that they are making themselves more akin to the other two parties, take last week's suggestion from some Lib Dem MPs that they reposition the party under a new banner of "tough liberalism" for example, which might explain why they are not jumping on Labour as much as they might.

Perhaps if they were the major opposition it would be a chance for them to really define themselves, in a way that they just don't at the moment.

An interesting suggestion in the Guardian by David Clark as to how to defeat New Labour whilst still re-electing Labour here, which sort of echoes my musings yesterday.

Most interesting bit is:

One answer might be a new and more sophisticated form of tactical voting. The risk of overshoot increases if progressives act blindly and indiscriminately. Instead, they might rebel selectively according to agreed criteria. Why, for example, should they punish the 139 Labour MPs who rebelled against the Iraq war? Surely they should be rewarded. Equally, those living in the constituency of Gisela Stuart, the Labour backbencher who called for George Bush to be re-elected last November, may conclude that she is exactly the sort of MP who needs to be made an example of.

Difficulties arise with the MPs who fall between these extremes. A majority cannot be built out of Iraq rebels alone and there are many decent people who swallowed their doubts and supported the government out of a misplaced sense of loyalty or because they believed Blair's private assurances on WMD. But who are they? It is here that the information gap needs to be filled between now and polling day. Perhaps someone with the time and technical know-how will construct a website for progressive tactical voters.

There are certainly risks in this approach, but we must be clear that the responsibility for bringing many Labour voters to this point lies with Blair. Unity and loyalty are obligations on those who lead as well those who follow. In failing to remember this, Blair has forfeited the right to expect our automatic support.

Not sure how this would work in practice, without someone co-orindating it though?
 
 
Pingle!Pop
12:12 / 17.02.05
I do think that sometimes they are just not taken seriously and do not get the press coverage that the other two parties receive.

*Giggles*

Sorry. I, er, mean... please tell me the fact that the Tories get more coverage isn't because people actually take them seriously?

particularly given that if they are to take seats at the next election it is largely going to have to be by taking Tory seats not Labour ones

... Is this the case? I was rather under the impression that a lot of people are a teensy bit miffed at Labour about, say, Iraq for example, and their votes certainly wouldn't switch towards the Tories. Certainly, the "Strategic Voter 2005" website above seems to be based on the idea of getting whichever is the most prominent anti-war party in a constituency in, which usually means the Lib Dems. Do we have some statistics about this to play with somewhere?
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
12:29 / 17.02.05
I meant more that the Tories are given more press coverage than the Lib Dems because they are the major opposition and thus perceived as a more 'serious' threat to Labour.

God forbid anyone should actually take what the Tories say seriously.
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
12:43 / 17.02.05
As for the voting....I seem to remember reading somewhere that if the Lib Dems get a big swing towards them in the election, then thi will have the effect of them taking seats from Tories, but letting in Tories on seats which are currently Labour.

Perhaps this was media 'propagada', I will try and dig out where I got this from.
 
 
lord henry strikes back
11:30 / 18.02.05
I have always voted Lib Dem. It's a half and half thing for me in that I agree with certain elements of their policies (mostly relating to Europe, the war and civil liberties), and in other areas I either don't think that they'll do any worse or the sacrifice will be worth it (eg. that has been a bit talk about tightening up benefits which is mostly just to tempt a few disaffected tories).

However, an idea has been running around my mind for a while now. Maybe the best thing for the Lib Dems would actually be a massive swing to Labour at the next election. My logic runs that the Tories are already looking a little shaky as the official opposition and one last solid blow might just finnish them off. If the Tories actually split they would spread out across UKIP, BNP, Veritas, and so on, meaning that there would be no core around which a sizable party could form. This would leave the Lib Dems as the opposition by default, and being in that position would quickly begin to garner them votes from the 'only vote for a party that can win crowd'.

I'm not sure if this could be pulled off, but I think it's interesting non-the-less
 
 
invisible_al
13:43 / 28.02.05
Vote4Peace.org.uk might be useful as well, they have a similar idea to StrategicVoter.

I've also got a mate who may be standing for MP in his area if he's selected by the Liberal Democrats to stand. He's been a local councillor now for a year or two, you should be able to get an idea of what he's like from his blog here. Would I be out of order here if I pointed people to his paypal election account if he gets selected to stand?
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
22:36 / 28.02.05
What's the alternative to voting New Labour at the general election?

I'm thoroughly disillusioned by representative democracy.

...

What's the alternative to voting?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
10:11 / 01.03.05
There isn't one- at least not one that immediately effects the way the system works. Look, this is how I see voting- it takes very little time, it doesn't cost anything and you can attempt to elect someone who is a slightly better alternative. So what are you going to lose? 30 minutes of your life? Big deal!
 
 
lord henry strikes back
14:49 / 01.03.05
Temple, you could always emigrate. Both China and Cuba are non-democracies with, at least in parts, relatively high standards of living. If you have any type of transferable skills I'm sure you would be considered.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
23:04 / 01.03.05
(threadrot)
No thank you, State Capitalism works equally well in non-democratic countries. Did you know that The Third Way is required reading in China?
Anyway, I'm unskilled.
(/threadrot)

...

I'm disheartened by the New Labour government. They look and act more like One Nation Tories and that's probably what the disaffected conservatives wanted. What happened to all the socialist policies? Admittedly they've increased investment but ... foundation hospitals, no ethical arms policy and the invasion of Iraq?

I'm going to spoil my ballot paper. That does get counted, doesn't it?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
07:59 / 02.03.05
And the alternative is a party that will lower taxes thus disturbing services that aren't running properly on the amount of money we're taxed now. A party that frankly would have done every single thing that Labour has done wrong and more on top of that.

If you have two meals in front of you and you hate them both but there's no alternative you bloody eat the one that tastes slightly better.
 
 
lord henry strikes back
09:26 / 02.03.05
As far as I can tell, this is how we ended up where we are today:

Throughout the second half of the 20th century, the Tories were the 'natural party of government'. Politically they sat a bit to the right of centre (which is where the majority of middle class home owners sit, and they make up a sizeable chunk of regular voters). The few (old) Labour governments that we had since the war were not about public opinion moving to the left, but protests against the Tories. Basically, the Tories gave people the balance that they wanted: A well run economy, moderate taxation, functional (if basic) public services, etc. An interesting point that illustrates this is that, over that 50 year period, inverstment in public services was pretty constant under both parties. While investment as a proportion of GDP was alwasys lower under the Tories, those better run economies I mentioned meant that, in real terms, there was little change.

Around 1994, Blair, Brown, Mandy and the rest (all of them career politicians) started to prod the Labour party to the right, to the point where they were butting up against the Tories. When Labour were elected in 1997 (an election that they would have won anyway, voters were ready for another anti-Tory protest) instead of getting a leftist government which would raise taxes, slow economic growth, and send everyone running back to the Tories four years later, they got a Tory clone without the baggage. Suddenly the Tories couldn't simply wait for voters to flood back to them. The only thing that they could do was drift ever further to the right, becoming less and less electable as they did, and leaving the 'natural party of government' spot (that little place just to the right of centre) to Labour alone.

Unless something changes (such as the introduction of PR) I can see the next 50 years shaping up just like the last, except with the parties reversed. As to 'what's the alternative', I'm going to keep voting Lib Dem and hoping (that the Tories fall apart, or something). The only way that I can see that we could end this tendency of one dominant party, with a single-term protest party as the only other option, is to get rid of the bloody first past the post system. But then why would any government want to do that?
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
00:43 / 06.03.05
Nina de Lo - If you have two meals in front of you and you hate them both but there's no alternative you bloody eat the one that tastes slightly better.

Then I would honestly rather not eat.

lord henry wotton - Not to mention child poverty, homelessness, naming David Kelly, underemployment, Wal Mart ending collective pay bargaining at Asda, Rupert Murdoch ordering a referendum on Europe, targeting British muslims, and so much more...

Proportional Respresentation, bearing in mind it's pros and cons, has the potential to breath fresh life into Parliamentary democracy, but as you said highly unlikely to happen.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
15:39 / 06.03.05
Okay, go ahead, don't vote but hear me now. You are providing the opportunity for the Conservative Party to lower taxes and privatise healthcare. To institute an Australian type immigration system. I swear to you that if the Tories get in and you dare to moan about the fact that it's worse on this board I am linking incessantly to this thread. I will push it in to your face, I will ensure that you take the responsibility that you will owe this country because you couldn't be arsed to put a cross in a box. Because it will be your fault, not mine, I'll vote for Labour despite an enduring hatred of them because I know that all of us were given the right to choose. Sure, I pretend I'm not going to vote when I'm feeling down but I'm no fool, I know that when you have a choice you should use it to its greatest effect and the greatest effect with a vote for governance over your life will never be to abstain. These people have power over you and you're prepared to hand it over absolutely. That's your choice but I'm never actually going to be caught in that trap.
 
 
lord henry strikes back
23:40 / 06.03.05
Nina, what are you getting at? I'm going to vote Lib Dem in a safe Labour constituency. So, as far as I can tell, when Labour win and imprison people without trial, invade naitons in the Middle East, allow companies to destroy the environment etc. it will be my fault because I vote Lib Dem/didn't vote Tory/didn't vote Green/choose not to vote.

Please explain.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
08:46 / 07.03.05
I think she was talking to Mr chocolate.
 
 
lord henry strikes back
11:27 / 07.03.05
Sorry. I did not mean to suggest that Nina was talking to me. I just assumed that, unless there is some private Nina/Temple war going on of which I am unaware, Nina's views would hold for anyone who intended to use their vote for any purpose other than keeping the Tories out of power, regardless of whether or not that option is open to them.
 
 
Spaniel
12:22 / 07.03.05
I have to say, Henry, I'm feeling similarly. I just can't stand the idea of supporting Labour, but I see Nina's point - the fact is, the Tories are worse. And by not voting for Labour I'm giving them a shot at power.

I fucking hate and resent being in this position,
and I want to punch the Labour front bench in the face SO NNNNNNGGGGHHHHHH HARD.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
14:02 / 07.03.05
While I take the above points, isn't voting Labour on the basis of what they (just about) aren't, ie the Conservative party, and pretty much in spite of their policies in a number of areas a fairly dangerous course ? Realistically, is another huge Labour landslide, which is what's going to happen if everyone's persuaded back into the fold because of 'Blues under the bed,' going to be taken as anything other than a sign that, to use his own unfortunate metaphor, Britain's still in love with Mr Tony ? Personally anyway it's not a message I can bear to send.
 
 
Nobody's girl
14:15 / 07.03.05
My current attitude about the Westminster elections? I'm voting for whoever the hell I want to and I refuse to be scare-mongered into voting Tory. Tactical voting is a crock of shit and props up the appalling first past the post voting system.

This is incredibly nasty of me but, if you lot south of the border want the Tories, you can have 'em for all I care. Call it revenge for the Poll Tax Scotland will never have a Tory government in power (they're the FOURTH party) and I'd love to see the tensions between a left wing Scottish Parliament and right wing Westminster. I suspect it would (finally) radicalise the left in Scotland if only because they wanna prove how much better they are than the evil Tories down south and we'd see some uber-liberal legislation passed. Bring it ON!
 
 
Spaniel
14:17 / 07.03.05
I vacillate between thinking I'm going to vote Green or Lib Dem and thinking I have no choice but to vote Labour. It all depends how convinced I am that Labour will actually win the next election.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply