Finally...a man who stands up and says what a lot of people really think

[oxford_fan]

Most people know where my vote is going for the time being. Some say they'd be a disaster.  I say they certainly couldn't do any worse than the current mob, or the ones before that.  They may even make some changes that will improve many things.

Are you saying you'd empower the Conservatives then? There are only two choices so I assume that's what you mean.

With regards to them not doing any worse: I think it is entirely possible. I have no doubt that they would improve a few things, and worsen many others. It wouldn't be markedly different whatever the case.

The whole ethos of top-end politics seems to be increasingly tit-for-tat; far too much finger pointing and not enough solutions or alternatives on offer.

[Talk Talk]

I was going to shut up Benjamin 

We do not have many free markets. Most are distorted by government interference, corporate cronyism and preferential regulation. How many MPs in this country have seats on the boards of companies? Loads.

If you remove those factors then why fear large monopolies? It doesn't happen. Even with the restriction on the licences for mobile phone operations in the UK, you still have five or six to choose from who fight tooth and nail with each other for your business. Even with state interference in most countries, you can still buy a car from a huge range of manufacturers around the world. You can do the same with motorcycles, there are even four different manufacturers in Japan. There are a huge range of private sector service suppliers - take accountants or solicitors - from one man bands to the big nationals.

The current financial mess in the States (and the knock on effects elsewhere) was caused by their government forcing the financial sector to take on risky sub-prime mortgage business which they would never have done on their own in a million years. It was far too risky. We have stock markets based on speculation (i.e short term gambling) fuelled by governments diverting funds into shares through deliberate methods, rather than free market investors who are in it for the long term who provide stability and interested capital to viable businesses.

Don't tell me that governments have 'made concessions' in recent years. It is blatantly not true. They have got deeper and deeper into every sphere of business and private life. Including logging all of your Facebook activity from next week on the pretext of terrorism prevention.

Sheesh.

Now I really will shut up and go to bed :-p

[deltaincline]

[oxford_fan]

Corporations are greedy, and monopolies are dangerous enough with government let alone without.

You seem to be blaming the current economic crisis solely on governance, when in reality the burden must be shared surely?

AIG weren't forced to enter the subprime business, were they?

[Ironside]

So we're not completely fucked by the government we have, right? I must have missed something as they don't seem to be doing a very good job at all. The 'democracy' we 'enjoy' is just an illusion. We have no ability to get rid of the ruling elite (of whatever colour) at the ballot box.

The truly free market is implicitly self regulating. Consider what competition does. If a business is bad, or ruthless, or evil, what happens? You use another supplier. You don't get that option with a government. Of any party. Anybody can start and run a business if they think they can do it better than the opposition. You've got absolutely zero chance of doing that with the services that the government fails to provide.

Don't be fucking stupid.  Democracy IS the best system we have. Democracy IS the only system that has any pedigree of sucess. Wed DO have the opportunity of removing the "ruling elite". You vote for the other alternatives. None of them are perfect but if every person out there continues to vote for the three main parties, nothing will change, in that you are correct.  The beautiful thing about democracy and the reason why it can effect change is that that people can and will, continue to present alternatives (Unless Labour get voted in again and ban all opposition).

[Ironside]

Are you saying you'd empower the Conservatives then? There are only two choices so I assume that's what you mean.

With regards to them not doing any worse: I think it is entirely possible. I have no doubt that they would improve a few things, and worsen many others. It wouldn't be markedly different whatever the case.

The whole ethos of top-end politics seems to be increasingly tit-for-tat; far too much finger pointing and not enough solutions or alternatives on offer.

No. I currently vote Nationalist.

You forget that every Labour government throughout history has brought us to the edge of the abyss.

I agree with your point about the ethos. That's why anyone who who votes for any of the three main establishmentg parties is lacking in the ability to think. They genrally go baah baah baah a lot.

Edit: I think a broad coalition government for at least one term could not only be beneficial to breath new life into the political scene in the Uk, but might also prove to be a realistic proposition next year. I just home that if that does happen, a significant part of the coalition is made up of the non-mainstream parties.

[Ironside]

Oh yeah, may have already been posted

[Lumps]

...and you think that socialism is the answer? 

'Clueless and completely laughable' right back at ya!

I think we've already established elsewhere that your lack of knowledge of what that word actually means doesn't really leave you in a position to judge

[herthab]

I think we've already established elsewhere that your lack of knowledge of what that word actually means doesn't really leave you in a position to judge

Can you give me one example of a truly socialist state, that exists today, independently?

[Simon Pieman]

I think the point I was trying to make is that apathy will lead to some even more corrupt individuals taking over. You don't like politician x? Well it could be him/her and without Democracy there would be no way to overthrow that leader. My argument is that if I don't like party x or the party, I can vote for party y instead. However, with no democratic system you'd be oppressed and unable to express the very opinions we're writing now.

In fact, there would be no defenses either, so we'd be open to a takeover.

Anyway as has already been mentioned:

Who would run the schools, health and transport services?
Who would police the nation?
How would we function with  worthless currency? A barter or gift society?
How would society sort out the chaos? Riots? Civil war?

It honestly reads like something from a novel or something you'd see in a film.

[Talk Talk]

I think the point I was trying to make is that apathy will lead to some even more corrupt individuals taking over. You don't like politician x? Well it could be him/her and without Democracy there would be no way to overthrow that leader. My argument is that if I don't like party x or the party, I can vote for party y instead. However, with no democratic system you'd be oppressed and unable to express the very opinions we're writing now.

Why would we be oppressed? Do you not think that we are incredibly repressed at the moment? If there was no state, who would oppress us? It is morally wrong for me to come round your house and use force to take money or property from you and likewise for you to do that to me. In a stateless society self defence would be the usual state of affairs. If you came to my house to oppress me I would that right to shoot, stab or beat you to death with a cricket bat.

In fact, there would be no defenses either, so we'd be open to a takeover.

From who? As above, everybody has a common law right to self defence. If you mean in a national sense, why not adopt the Swiss approach and we all agree to keep a sub machine gun in our houses. It works for them.

Anyway as has already been mentioned:

Who would run the schools, health and transport services?
Who would police the nation?
How would we function with  worthless currency? A barter or gift society?
How would society sort out the chaos? Riots? Civil war?

I've already answered that in an earlier reference. Why do you think that the state has a god-given right to be a monopoly on those things and as such to do them all so terribly, terribly badly? It is because you have been indoctrinated to think that way.

It honestly reads like something from a novel or something you'd see in a film.

Indeed it does. Listen, this is difficult stuff to put forward as an alternative because most people have an existing position to defend. As the end of that 'Statism Is Dead' video says, "If slavery is a choice then I choose NOT to be a slave. This is THE most frightening statement for the ruling classes, which is why they train their slaves to attack anyone who dares speak it". I can vouch for that.

[Talk Talk]

<John Harris video>

I bought a ticket to go to that BCG event in Stoke in January where John Harris gave that talk, but some family matters precluded me from going.

The man is right though. It is all an illusion. Good spot.

[Talk Talk]

Don't be fucking stupid.  Democracy IS the best system we have. Democracy IS the only system that has any pedigree of sucess. Wed DO have the opportunity of removing the "ruling elite". You vote for the other alternatives. None of them are perfect but if every person out there continues to vote for the three main parties, nothing will change, in that you are correct.  The beautiful thing about democracy and the reason why it can effect change is that that people can and will, continue to present alternatives (Unless Labour get voted in again and ban all opposition).

I disagree. You may change the party in Government but that doesn't mean that the other parties or MPs evaporate. They are still collectively the ruling elite and will steal as much from you and I as they can, in government or not (how come Tony Blair is now worth a fortune - perhaps millions on a lowly MP and then a PM's salary? Or Gorbachov who sucked the USSR dry before it went tits up and now has property all around the world?). There are too many vested interests in the big three for the BNP, Libertarian Party, UKIP or any other party to get a foothold in Westminster. Or the EU for that matter. It just won't happen. They will use underhand methods and dirty tricks if it comes to it.

Wake up!

[Simon Pieman]

Someone with the resources to outgun individuals would oppress individuals.

The point about using force to defend yourself and attack others is indeed the point I'm trying to make. There would be total anarchy. The over publicised gang culture would become a reality - it would be everywhere. A large group of people with machine guns would more than likely kill you, rape your family and kill them too. What if you were instead rounded up and enslaved? Without any sort of policing it could ad would happen.

There is a lot wrong with this country but there would be even more without anyone to run or organise it. It would definitely be like Mad Max.

[Colin Todd]

this thread is massively entertaining and more than a little bit mental