View Single Post
Unread 5 Jun 2007, 13:55   #53
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?

I would support labour for the minimum wage, freedom of information act, european social chapter and the gay rights. However the civil liberties stuff and Iraq pretty much efface all that. But again, I really don't think the conservatives would have enacted the things on my aforementioned list and I think they would have gone to war and eroded civil liberties in the same way.

I do, however, believe that a change of government is necessary to punish labour for iraq and the eroding of civil liberties. I don't see it as voting for the lesser of two evils - I believe labour and conversative are as evil as each other - but more as teaching labour a listening lesson. Anything less is vindication of all labour's wrongs.

Because of this I'm tempted to vote conservative. But it's slightly more likely that I'll vote Lib Dem, not because I agree with them on much, but because it may force a coalition, and thus less of a disregard.

This brings me onto something that really annoys me. People always say "I want my vote to matter so I won't vote for X." When you look at your vote as one in an ocean then indeed it means hardly anything. But this is why you need to engage in civil society, to argue, to debate, so, with everyone else's arguments competing for prominence, you become part of a group, and idea, which can force change; as opposed to broadly aligning with one party and swallowing all the faeces they present.

Back to punishing labour, I don't believe that this tactical voting, which seems to me as trying plead a party into being less awful, will work in the long term. Both parties know they can get back into government eventually and therefore only have to listen a little more than the other party, which is to say not much.

So most people realise there's precious little difference between the parties and do not change their vote because they assume (or know if they also choose not to engage in any kind of political activity, which most people don't) it won't matter.

Just bring in the proportional voting system. Or enact some kind of political renaissance. Sorry, I meant: Just bring in the proportional voting system.
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote