Order or Chaos ? if you want true democracy, then your moving towards chaos and if you want any democracy, then you need some measure of populism/independence, to apply leverage to party machines who are unwilling to change things, if its against their inner party attitudes which are not generally subject to public oversight.This thread has thrown up at perhaps the expense of @UKRaider Original post topic, perhaps a deeper question, about the political landscape and or political system today.
Perhaps I should start a new thread I thought but rather this thread as do so many others branch into something that is not the original line of posts.
I have asked and mentioned this question, in threads of my own and in threads of this nature of others.
What is the role of Government.
That is to say in simplistic but fundamental term where is and where should be the split between collectivism and individualism. How I see this pertains to 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions', is there has been several differing opinions about Laurence Fox's motivations also the likelihood of success for any political party personality in our current political system.
So firstly I will address 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions'. Without talking extensively or having a personal relationship with the man, we can all only surmise his honesty for ourselves, without doubt he had extensive coverage in the main stream media as a 'heretic' to the PC orthodoxy, that is what has lead to his extensive coverage, in the alternative media and importantly in the 'Long Form' and at times free wheeling discussion format. Of note this is a format that has largely disappeared in the mainstream media.
Those of us who, have to some degree or another abandoned the mainstream media, for the Alt media, for reasons that have been fulsomely covered in many other threads. Perhaps see 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions' more as a call for many of the voting public to engage more fully and take more responsibility with our individual vote, than as a call for 'VOTE For ME'. Which was the point of my first post in this thread.
Thus the whys and wherefores, the success or failures of 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions' is perhaps more than can he form a party that can join the political system, too effect change rather for me it's that and other posters have also pointed to this perhaps he can be a focus for those who consider that politics is not there primary interest or sport and to some degree or another liked things as they where a few years or a few decades ago, but feel voiceless for what ever reason good or bad.
Politics across the decades have always had some 'political disrupters' actions be counted, the most successful of these though do not intend or are not there to burn the system down, rather to take a step back and consider fundamental principles.
We know already that there is a minority of 'political 'disrupters', some on the right, but factually and predominantly on the left, who do very much want to burn the system down. There belief is that it is flawed in principle concepts and results. In both cases they never acknowledge that there is such a thing as to much government and too much regulation of both the collective or individual.
Which leads me time and time again to that question and considered to some degree in this thread;
What is the role of Government. And in considering that how should the people be represented which is a question many of us I believe , think is a fundamental question of this year, and perhaps the decade, although there is a fair chance of the 'Apocalyptic Zombie Meteor Alien Virus invasion' idiocracy striking down all before it well before 2021 let alone 2029.
Note I have no doubt, that more than one of us have invested in a spare jar of coffee just in case, it's never to early to prepare. So.
How should the people be represented. Firstly we have to allow the assumption that the majority think that the political system we have at this time is a bit fcuked., but that we as a whole think the systematic principles are good its just a bit 'NAAFI' at this time.
There are of course many many, reasons for this, let us look at one, and agree that differing political parties of differing idealogical cores, is a decent thing and we want to keep it as a core of choosing where about any particular group stands in the grand scheme. Once we accept that we can then choose which group rules.
Once again here 'lies the rub' If political parties all head towards the centre to gain power, idealogical cores tend to become at best a little blurred at worst a big tent that accommodates all but is riven with the sounds of those who can screech loudest, getting all the attention while everyone else is ignored.
Which is to a degree where we are now. There is a reason that there is a lack of 'Independent' candidates who manage to enter politics and more so succeed. Firstly the single issue label and secondly that 'Independent' candidates do not make it onto the governments benches.
However I maintain that perhaps there is space for perhaps more 'Independent' politicians to make a difference, without making the present party system parliamentary process turn into some 'behind closed doors horse-trading collation' for that read 'idealogical core values thrown under the bus' which rightly or wrong proportional representation does bring.
Perhaps a new thread is required but I see a lot of crossover in the questions and thoughts being posted re: 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions'.
Some form of proportional representation and elections to the Lords seems the fastest way to introduce a bit of representation for ALL, whilst retaining a working parliament based on the solid principles of FPP.