Such remarks from grey men in the shadows coming out into the open should be ringing alarm bells. Especially when they come from a former prime minister. It signals the move of a country in a less progressive direction. Such loss of political pluralism represents a potentially very troubling era for democracy. The advocation of a permanent merger between the Tories and the Lib Dems, is a defacto call for the UK to become a two party state. This is far to the right of being a 'conservative' position. What comes next - a far right one party state?
John Major: let's keep the Coalition after the next election
- Thread starter goebfwai
- Start date
Oswaldtwistle
Banned
I certainly wouldn't bet against the Liberals and Tories merging, with a few leftie LibDems defecting to Labour.
The sticking issue might be Europe. Would the 'Cornerstone' group in the Tory party stand for a merger? And if they couldn't stop it, would they break away and work with UKIP?
The sticking issue might be Europe. Would the 'Cornerstone' group in the Tory party stand for a merger? And if they couldn't stop it, would they break away and work with UKIP?
Steel Icarus
we move
I think, given the yellow Tories are likely to get precisely fuck-all in the next election, the question is an irrelevance.
Combustible
Well-Known Member
Major would probably like a permanent coalition so that the Tories could continue to ignore the Eurosceptics in the party even more then they do already.
binka
!!!!!!!!!
at least people will know what they are voting for if they merged parties. surely its much more anti democratic to pretend to be some left alternative to get votes then abandoning all 'principles' once in power?
Oswaldtwistle
Banned
'Cornerstone' aren't just about anti-EU, although it is certainly a big part of their platform. From their website.......
We believe in – the spiritual values which have informed British institutions, our culture and our nation’s sense of identity for centuries, underpinned by the belief in a strong nation state.
We stand for - the Monarchy; traditional marriage; family and community duties; proper pride in our nation’s distinctive qualities; quality of life over soulless utility; social responsibility over personal selfishness; social justice as civic duty, not state dependency; compassion for those in need; reducing government waste; lower taxation and deregulation; our ancient liberties against politically correct censorship and a commitment to our democratically elected parliament
http://cornerstonegroup.wordpress.com/about/
They are actually quite an interesting bunch of people, even though I find some of their views (such as regarding gay people) very offensive, other things they say are quite interesting. I would certainly agree with "quality of life over soulless utility; social responsibility over personal selfishness; social justice as civic duty, not state dependency; compassion for those in need", although these easy things to say and harder things to do, and agree totally with their defence of "our ancient liberties against politically correct censorship"
Cornerstoner Douglas Carswell is always worth listening to, IMHO.
Obviously I think they are utter slime but this illustrates the point I've made a few times on this board about the Tory right in cabinet (in the shape of IDS and Fox) being the only ones to put up any sort of resistance to cuts; it's the Lib Dem ministers who've been the fiscal hard-liners. It's no surprise that the far right of the Tory party puts greater emphasis on social issues than on the "free" economy - these people are the ideological inheritors of the Monday Club.
My parents' MP is Cornerstone member David Mundell, who started out in the SDP.
I don't see how people will more readily know what they are voting for if the Tories and the Lib Dems eventually merged. It is hard enough to keep track of the manifestos of one party, let alone two. Developing a combined manifesto for 2 parties that are so different would take so long and be riven with such argument, it would never come to anything.
A small, but sizable number of people, particularly students, voted for the Lib Dems because of their resolute opposition to student tuition fee increases. However, most people voted Labour in the recent General Election. Few people actually voted LibDem. But those who did vote Clegg, effectively got Cameron, with Clegg as Cameron's side kick marionette. And MASSIVE tuition fee increases, a complete volte face in LibDem policy. Labour now have no government power, despite the majority (but not a working majority) of people voting for them. Labour voters have been completely disenfranchised by the current unconstitutional administration, which has no electoral or popular mandate to implement their policies, particularly the cutbacks.
Democracy is all about people power and should be all about choice. Reducing a system from 3 main parties to 2, would make the problem of abandonment of party principles once in power worse, not better. What is better - having 1 other main big party in opposition large enough to act as a counterbalance, or 2? 2 is better than 1.
At the moment, we only have 1 large opposition party, now that the Quislings in the Lib Dems (who few voted for) are in power. That is a massive sea change in the British political landscape. I think British politics and a fully functional, working democracy, is already the worse for that, and will continue to be the worse for that.
As a consequence, I think politics and national life will now move in a highly unwelcome and anti-democratic direction that few people as yet realise and are fully prepared for.
Oswaldtwistle
Banned
IDS is also quite interesting. He is very socially conservative but I do think he has genuine concern for the poor.
It's ironic that Cameron might actually find it *easier* to get cuts through with a minority Tory party as part of a healthy ConDem majority than he would have done with a single figure Conservative majority.
_angel_
.
Oh please his piety makes me want to puke actually. He thinks being without a job is somehow 'sinful' ffs.
binka
!!!!!!!!!
i see where you are coming from but i think you are starting from the position that our parliamentary system is worth defending. labour aren't a counterbalance to the tories, neither were the lib dems. the difference between the three is so negligable they may aswell all merge into 1 party anyway.
the problem with our democracy isn't the parties its the system they operate in.
Oswaldtwistle
Banned
Did he use that word? Do you have a link to the full quote?
BTW I said the bloke was 'interesting'. I never said I agreed with him
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
genuine concern for the poor? Taking away 10percent of their housing benefit leaving them with £50 a week to live on, forcing them to work for nothing for 4 weeks, all kinds of other clampdowns, yeah right , some mate of the poor HE is!!
It's for their own good. He cares, no. He loves the poor. Tough love.
_angel_
.
Don't forget the benefits cap which will hit large families and forcing lone parents to take work on threat of starving them and their kids for three years into the gutter.
there's that fucking many of them you can't remember half of em, it's like the conveyor belt on Brucies Generation Game but instead of prizes they're kicks in the teeth for the poor
...from someone who CARES apparently!
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Prince Rhyus
Spokesman of King Antonio
I think part of it comes from wishing that he was in a similar position when he was PM.
Remember the fun and games he had with the Tory right in the mid 90s? Teresa Gorman, Bill Cash, Norman Lamont, John Redwood etc.
Well, Cameron can see off any challenges from the right on the argument that they must compromise to keep the Coalition together. How long this argument will be sustainable for I don't know.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
nope - the death/obliteration of the libdems, which - given that they are, after all Tory Plan B - is a rather welcome development. Works well against the blue and yellow scum equally well.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
It is exactly this. The next election could see the Libs and Tories reduced to one seat each and very little would actually change, in fact - based on what happened since 1997 - it would probably get a lot worse.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
He doesn't have "concern", he has a supposed "sense of duty", informed by religion and a narrow sense of morality, which is why the "neo-Victorian" label that has been attached to some of his policy proposals is so apt: it's where his head is at.
A nasty nip in the air.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
Labour got 29% of the vote%, the libdems 23%, how the hell can what you've said be true of either party?
or this?
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
This, really. The Lib Dems have been behind "other" in the polls for weeks now. On current polls, Clegg would lose his seat if he fought Sheffield Hallam again - and there can't be many Lib Dems where that isn't yet the case (anyone know if there are any who still look reasonably safe?).
Unless by some improbable quirk the austerity approach succeeds in producing an economic miracle when it has most often led to economic disaster whenever it has been tried, there will be very few Lib Dems left next election. Given that their economic policy is suicidal, I can't see them being better off at the next election whether it happens next week, next year or if they manage to hang on for the full term.
There'll be a de facto merger if not a formal one, with some Lib Dems becoming Tories or taking a seat in the Lords as blue or yellow Tories, and a handful defecting to Labour or the Greens.
It wouldn't surprise me if there were more Green MPs than Lib Dem at the next election - they are the only parliamentary party making it clear that cuts are not necessary at all.
I can't see any Libdem MPs defecting to the Greens, maybe one or two to Labour.
To be honest I think the Greens will fuck things up over the next five years and be quite likely to have to work hard to keep their one seat, mainly because the sensible middle of the road pragmatists will win the argument that the party can't be "too radical".
Which is the same reason Labour are going to have to start fighting a lot harder and adopt a more radical anti cuts message than they currently want to, if they want to take advantage of the general hatred of the coalition. I think the only certainty of the next election will be the destruction of the Libdems as a viable political force.
To be honest I think the Greens will fuck things up over the next five years and be quite likely to have to work hard to keep their one seat, mainly because the sensible middle of the road pragmatists will win the argument that the party can't be "too radical".
Which is the same reason Labour are going to have to start fighting a lot harder and adopt a more radical anti cuts message than they currently want to, if they want to take advantage of the general hatred of the coalition. I think the only certainty of the next election will be the destruction of the Libdems as a viable political force.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
I don't know anything about internal Green party politics, but I'd have thought it would be the Green Left being bolstered by these events more than the Green Life-Stylists, no? Not that it's relevant to my argument - it wasn't predicated on any major parliamentary party having decent policies, that would be hopelessly naive.
Similar threads
- Poll
