|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jul 2, 2024 21:20:39 GMT
It does not seem unreasonable to expect that the internal processes of an organisation taking part in a democratic event are themselves both formalised and democratic, and I would go far as to say that it should be made a statutory requirement for any nationally registered party. Sadly, there are posters on here would deem that an unacceptable restriction on liberty, or some such phrase. The mere fact that the structure of Reform is common knowledge on here does not make it okay. I am pleased to assert that any party must have the right to run itself in any manner it sees fit, under any system or no system at all, and with any rules or no rules at all. These are all quite private internal matters like conduct within a family. Frankly it is no damn business of yours or any of the other interfering busybodies on this site. But, he doesn't like the way they do it, sir. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jul 2, 2024 21:25:33 GMT
The internal affairs of a political party are a matter only for that party and it's members It might be of some interest to potential voters. The attacks on the Union bloc vote was long a feature of press articles. You can tell voters how Reform is run. If the voters don't like it they won't vote for them and that may force them to change. It doesn't stop Reform in its current guise being a legitimate political party. A poster said it wasn't which started this whole back and forth. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135 
|
Post by Foggy on Jul 2, 2024 22:16:25 GMT
It might be of some interest to potential voters. The attacks on the Union bloc vote was long a feature of press articles. I think potential voters are more concerned with pressure on wages, house prices, open borders, the diminution of savings etc etc etc. The criticism of Reform's internal workings are just a displacement activity to avoid open and free debate about the issues I've outlined above Yes indeed, my comment on a forum is bound to set the media agenda for the final day of campaigning to ensure that Reform sink even further. Heck, even the wider "a PLC, not a political party" jibe only seems to have cut through into echo chambers. (FWIW I agree that Reform meets the legal definition of a political party in this country - I just think there was a gap in the PPERA 2000 which they've exploited.) Everyone here must have an interest in psephological data but there are a good half dozen who clearly are not on the side of democracy if you're offended by the suggestion that the internal workings of a national political party should be required to be democratic in order for it to be properly registered. An election is very much a public event so its participants cannot not have quite the same free rein that a private gentlemen's establishment or country club to decide its internal working Note that I'm not saying we should prescribe the minutiae of how a leadership election ought to work - our main 3 parties all use different methods after all, whilst the Greens have co-leadership - just that it needs to follow some semblance of democratic norms which the Tice/Farage stitch-up of a month ago clearly did not. |
|
|
|
Post by observer on Jul 2, 2024 22:22:29 GMT
I think potential voters are more concerned with pressure on wages, house prices, open borders, the diminution of savings etc etc etc. The criticism of Reform's internal workings are just a displacement activity to avoid open and free debate about the issues I've outlined above Yes indeed, my comment on a forum is bound to set the media agenda for the final day of campaigning to ensure that Reform sink even further. Heck, even the wider "a PLC, not a political party" jibe only seems to have cut through into echo chambers. (FWIW I agree that Reform meets the legal definition of a political party in this country - I just think there was a gap in the PPERA 2000 which they've exploited.) Everyone here must have an interest in psephological data but there are a good half dozen who clearly are not on the side of democracy if you're offended by the suggestion that the internal workings of a national political party should be required to be democratic in order for it to be properly registered. An election is very much a public event so its participants cannot not have quite the same free rein that a private gentlemen's establishment or country club to decide its internal working Note that I'm not saying we should prescribe the minutiae of how a leadership election ought to work - our main 3 parties all use different methods after all, whilst the Greens have co-leadership - just that it needs to follow some semblance of democratic norms which the Tice/Farage stitch-up of a month ago clearly did not. You miss the point by a mile. I was talking about Reform's opponents obsessing about the internal affairs of Reform as a device to actually avoid discussion of the issues. A displacement activity. We could be discussing mass immigration, wage pressure, interest rates, house prices, lockdowns, civil liberties, so-called climate change, unaffordable energy bills etc etc. But...oh no, the left wants to talk about another party's party management. I remember when other parties actually wanted to discuss the main issues |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Jul 2, 2024 22:25:42 GMT
I thought I addressed that point. I said the only people talking about it are already in echo chambers with other people who were never going to vote Reform in the first place.
Bringing such an opinion onto a message board with a variety of viewpoints, including those sympathetic to Reform, seems to have touched a nerve though.
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 2, 2024 22:29:40 GMT
I think potential voters are more concerned with pressure on wages, house prices, open borders, the diminution of savings etc etc etc. The criticism of Reform's internal workings are just a displacement activity to avoid open and free debate about the issues I've outlined above Yes indeed, my comment on a forum is bound to set the media agenda for the final day of campaigning to ensure that Reform sink even further. Heck, even the wider "a PLC, not a political party" jibe only seems to have cut through into echo chambers. (FWIW I agree that Reform meets the legal definition of a political party in this country - I just think there was a gap in the PPERA 2000 which they've exploited.) Everyone here must have an interest in psephological data but there are a good half dozen who clearly are not on the side of democracy if you're offended by the suggestion that the internal workings of a national political party should be required to be democratic in order for it to be properly registered. An election is very much a public event so its participants cannot not have quite the same free rein that a private gentlemen's establishment or country club to decide its internal working Note that I'm not saying we should prescribe the minutiae of how a leadership election ought to work - our main 3 parties all use different methods after all, whilst the Greens have co-leadership - just that it needs to follow some semblance of democratic norms which the Tice/Farage stitch-up of a month ago clearly did not. If one requires freedom, responsibility and democracy it would be necessary to have no regulation and no rules. I am and have always been totally opposed to any form of registration or bureaucratic interference with political parties. And why should any putative party have to satisfy your woke demands or even be in any way democratic at all? Why do you get to set the rules? Why have any rules at all? If people wish to set up a Stalinist Communist party what is wrong with that? Or a crypto-fascist party either? Your problem and the people like you is that some of us might set up parties with an agenda you hate and revile, but which happens to be rather popular! You are all inherently anti-democratic but uber-progressive and seem to think if a party is actually anti-progressive it should not be permitted to exist. You want to see an approved and moderated progressive partial occasional elective democracy on your terms only. |
|
|
|
Post by observer on Jul 2, 2024 22:31:16 GMT
I thought I addressed that point. I said the only people talking about it are already in echo chambers with other people who were never going to vote Reform in the first place. Bringing such an opinion onto a message board with a variety of viewpoints, including those sympathetic to Reform, seems to have touched a nerve though. It hasn't touched a nerve at all. Your displacement activity is so noticeable that it's remarkable. And it must be that you want to discuss arcanae to avoid proper discussion |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Jul 2, 2024 22:44:06 GMT
Well, two replies within a few minutes from the usual suspects makes any claim it hasn't touched a nerve ring hollow.
I find it strange to imply that wanting a formal system of political party registration and the requirement that they be democratic is some modern, trendy demand. The Register of Political Parties is now 26 years old, the Electoral Commission 24, and many other countries set up their equivalents before we did.
For instance, there's a simple two-line clause in the Spanish Constitution (drafted two decades before our Registration of Political Parties Act) - Article 6 - which straightforwardly says that the "internal structure and functioning [of political parties] must be democratic". Not even the far-right party there, Vox, has ever disputed this or been threatened with judicial recourse because of it, to be knowledge. Which raises the question of what Reform supporters would be so afraid of?
Anyway, whatever else there is to discuss outside of the internal workings of Reform, it should be probably left to another thread. This seat will clearly be a comfortable Labour hold.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jul 3, 2024 4:15:28 GMT
I think potential voters are more concerned with pressure on wages, house prices, open borders, the diminution of savings etc etc etc. The criticism of Reform's internal workings are just a displacement activity to avoid open and free debate about the issues I've outlined above Yes indeed, my comment on a forum is bound to set the media agenda for the final day of campaigning to ensure that Reform sink even further. Heck, even the wider "a PLC, not a political party" jibe only seems to have cut through into echo chambers. (FWIW I agree that Reform meets the legal definition of a political party in this country - I just think there was a gap in the PPERA 2000 which they've exploited.) Everyone here must have an interest in psephological data but there are a good half dozen who clearly are not on the side of democracy if you're offended by the suggestion that the internal workings of a national political party should be required to be democratic in order for it to be properly registered. An election is very much a public event so its participants cannot not have quite the same free rein that a private gentlemen's establishment or country club to decide its internal working Note that I'm not saying we should prescribe the minutiae of how a leadership election ought to work - our main 3 parties all use different methods after all, whilst the Greens have co-leadership - just that it needs to follow some semblance of democratic norms which the Tice/Farage stitch-up of a month ago clearly did not. Nobody is offended by you saying that Reform UK should have democratic internal workings, we just don't agree it needs to, to be a political party. We don't believe it should be legislated that they should have to have democratic internal working to be a political party. If the voters dont like the fact Reform doesn't have democratic internal workings, they don't have to vote for it. I note when parties with democratic internal workings don't fully use them and have crowned party leaders, like Gordon Brown and Theresa May, those leaders tend to find it harder to attract voters You have an ideal for what the internal workings of a political party should be like, fair enough, but it's your ideal, not essential in our view. Personally I think you should be thankful Reform doesn't have such democratic internal working because if it did I believe it would be better organised and higher in the polls, at the expense of all the other parties, which is something I suspect you would prefer not to be happening. In the end you and I, have completely different philosophies on how political parties should be operate, hence our disagreement and this debate. As far as I'm concerned I am happy to agree too disagree with you, in the end the only ones hurt by their structure in my opinion are Reform themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 3, 2024 5:11:25 GMT
There are three things I'll respond to here.
1. Having rules and regulations is how countries function. The Register of Political Parties is rather niche and arcane, yet without it ballot papers became a wild west of trickery and fraud. Ditto, without it, the financial moderation of parties was somewhat vague and soft touch. We need to know who is involved with a political party, and how they are financed.
2. It's not 'woke' to question perceived wisdom on the internal workings of a political party, particularly one like Reform where certain aspects are somewhat vague (in the light of Channel 4's investigation, I hesitate to use the phrase 'bad actors ').
3. Mainstream politics will always react against extreme politics. Reform is extreme. Reform is not just 'ruffling feathers', it wants to Trumpify British society, and given that I can draw a straight line from this day in the calendar to the branding of UK Supreme Court judges as 'enemies of the people ', I don't really feel comfortable with that extreme.
Democracy doesn't die because people are 'woke'. It dies when mavericks and extremists push against the necessary rules, regulations, and structures necessary for society to function. Reform is an extremist party.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jul 3, 2024 7:08:20 GMT
There are three things I'll respond to here. 1. Having rules and regulations is how countries function. The Register of Political Parties is rather niche and arcane, yet without it ballot papers became a wild west of trickery and fraud. Ditto, without it, the financial moderation of parties was somewhat vague and soft touch. We need to know who is involved with a political party, and how they are financed. 2. It's not 'woke' to question perceived wisdom on the internal workings of a political party, particularly one like Reform where certain aspects are somewhat vague (in the light of Channel 4's investigation, I hesitate to use the phrase 'bad actors '). 3. Mainstream politics will always react against extreme politics. Reform is extreme. Reform is not just 'ruffling feathers', it wants to Trumpify British society, and given that I can draw a straight line from this day in the calendar to the branding of UK Supreme Court judges as 'enemies of the people ', I don't really feel comfortable with that extreme. Democracy doesn't die because people are 'woke'. It dies when mavericks and extremists push against the necessary rules, regulations, and structures necessary for society to function. Reform is an extremist party. Democracy dies when people become alienated from it and stop getting involved, not due to wokeism or extremism. Reform really isn't an extremist party, its a gobby party, that is part of what hasn't impressed me about them during this election. Reform is in my opinion held back by this gobbiness and saying things for headlines and little else, a good proportion of what is said is not believed, really meant, by those saying it. It would be better for Reform themselves, and us, if they were more of a traditionally structured party than they are, as it would rid them of some of the nobheads they've become entangled with. Why? Because we are not the USA and long term Trump style tactics won't work here. I think Farage knows this and is only currently using this approach because he has an inept Conservative Party he can bounce off. Once the Conservatives get their house in order Farage will have to try a different strategy to stay relevant, that's if he wants to. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 3, 2024 8:10:05 GMT
There are three things I'll respond to here. 1. Having rules and regulations is how countries function. The Register of Political Parties is rather niche and arcane, yet without it ballot papers became a wild west of trickery and fraud. Ditto, without it, the financial moderation of parties was somewhat vague and soft touch. We need to know who is involved with a political party, and how they are financed. 2. It's not 'woke' to question perceived wisdom on the internal workings of a political party, particularly one like Reform where certain aspects are somewhat vague (in the light of Channel 4's investigation, I hesitate to use the phrase 'bad actors '). 3. Mainstream politics will always react against extreme politics. Reform is extreme. Reform is not just 'ruffling feathers', it wants to Trumpify British society, and given that I can draw a straight line from this day in the calendar to the branding of UK Supreme Court judges as 'enemies of the people ', I don't really feel comfortable with that extreme. Democracy doesn't die because people are 'woke'. It dies when mavericks and extremists push against the necessary rules, regulations, and structures necessary for society to function. Reform is an extremist party. Cut the crap and just say what you mean. You don't like us because our views sometimes repel you and you don't want them aired or permitted to have the oxygen of publicity. It matters particularly because we appear to be quite popular and are growing quite rapidly and look to be overhauling and gaining more votes than the hard working, long in place, LDs. So you wish to constrain us with rules and regs to marginalize us and defeat our party of the democratic upsurge because it is the wrong type of upsurge with union flags and a very white patriotic core that makes you bristle with rage. We are on to you and your like. We shall beat you. This is just the start of our European movement of the Right. Watch this space and in particular watch our penetration of a significant element of the under 30s votes. This may become pivotal. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 3, 2024 9:13:20 GMT
There are three things I'll respond to here. 1. Having rules and regulations is how countries function. The Register of Political Parties is rather niche and arcane, yet without it ballot papers became a wild west of trickery and fraud. Ditto, without it, the financial moderation of parties was somewhat vague and soft touch. We need to know who is involved with a political party, and how they are financed. 2. It's not 'woke' to question perceived wisdom on the internal workings of a political party, particularly one like Reform where certain aspects are somewhat vague (in the light of Channel 4's investigation, I hesitate to use the phrase 'bad actors '). 3. Mainstream politics will always react against extreme politics. Reform is extreme. Reform is not just 'ruffling feathers', it wants to Trumpify British society, and given that I can draw a straight line from this day in the calendar to the branding of UK Supreme Court judges as 'enemies of the people ', I don't really feel comfortable with that extreme. Democracy doesn't die because people are 'woke'. It dies when mavericks and extremists push against the necessary rules, regulations, and structures necessary for society to function. Reform is an extremist party. Cut the crap and just say what you mean. You don't like us because our views sometimes repel you and you don't want them aired or permitted to have the oxygen of publicity. It matters particularly because we appear to be quite popular and are growing quite rapidly and look to be overhauling and gaining more votes than the hard working, long in place, LDs. So you wish to constrain us with rules and regs to marginalize us and defeat our party of the democratic upsurge because it is the wrong type of upsurge with union flags and a very white patriotic core that makes you bristle with rage. We are on to you and your like. We shall beat you. This is just the start of our European movement of the Right. Watch this space and in particular watch our penetration of a significant element of the under 30s votes. This may become pivotal. I'm an open minded, broad minded, middle aged homosexual, of course I'm going to oppose small minded, blinkered, negative conservatism. That's how it works, Carlton. I'm not a Nationalist, I've seen what nationalism really means, and I'm correct it wanting it restrained and controlled. What you want is Trumpian/Bannonite revolution, as sadly evidenced by the Supreme Court rulings against Chevron last week, and immunity this week: no administrative state, no checks, no regulations, no guidelines, no restraints. And as a democract, I'm going to oppose that too. Without structure, all buildings fall, and you're not the only foreman with a clipboard, if I can muddle the analogy. Reform is just another attempt, going back to the BNP from my youth and the Blackshirts from yours, which ultimately fail the way they always fail. Britain embraces tradition but always rejects extremism. Britain protects its history and always looks forward. The kids are alright because they've grown up to respect a much broader world than the one you wish to impose. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 3, 2024 9:22:37 GMT
Cut the crap and just say what you mean. You don't like us because our views sometimes repel you and you don't want them aired or permitted to have the oxygen of publicity. It matters particularly because we appear to be quite popular and are growing quite rapidly and look to be overhauling and gaining more votes than the hard working, long in place, LDs. So you wish to constrain us with rules and regs to marginalize us and defeat our party of the democratic upsurge because it is the wrong type of upsurge with union flags and a very white patriotic core that makes you bristle with rage. We are on to you and your like. We shall beat you. This is just the start of our European movement of the Right. Watch this space and in particular watch our penetration of a significant element of the under 30s votes. This may become pivotal. I'm an open minded, broad minded, middle aged homosexual, of course I'm going to oppose small minded, blinkered, negative conservatism. That's how it works, Carlton. I'm not a Nationalist, I've seen what nationalism really means, and I'm correct it wanting it restrained and controlled. What you want is Trumpian/Bannonite revolution, as sadly evidenced by the Supreme Court rulings against Chevron last week, and immunity this week: no administrative state, no checks, no regulations, no guidelines, no restraints. And as a democract, I'm going to oppose that too. Without structure, all buildings fall, and you're not the only foreman with a clipboard, if I can muddle the analogy. Reform is just another attempt, going back to the BNP from my youth and the Blackshirts from yours, which ultimately fail the way they always fail. Britain embraces tradition but always rejects extremism. Britain protects its history and always looks forward. The kids are alright because they've grown up to respect a much broader world than the one you wish to impose. That is a good response Dok and carefully expressed. I reject it of course. |
|
|
|
Post by observer on Jul 3, 2024 9:26:30 GMT
Cut the crap and just say what you mean. You don't like us because our views sometimes repel you and you don't want them aired or permitted to have the oxygen of publicity. It matters particularly because we appear to be quite popular and are growing quite rapidly and look to be overhauling and gaining more votes than the hard working, long in place, LDs. So you wish to constrain us with rules and regs to marginalize us and defeat our party of the democratic upsurge because it is the wrong type of upsurge with union flags and a very white patriotic core that makes you bristle with rage. We are on to you and your like. We shall beat you. This is just the start of our European movement of the Right. Watch this space and in particular watch our penetration of a significant element of the under 30s votes. This may become pivotal. I'm an open minded, broad minded, middle aged homosexual, of course I'm going to oppose small minded, blinkered, negative conservatism. That's how it works, Carlton. I'm not a Nationalist, I've seen what nationalism really means, and I'm correct it wanting it restrained and controlled. What you want is Trumpian/Bannonite revolution, as sadly evidenced by the Supreme Court rulings against Chevron last week, and immunity this week: no administrative state, no checks, no regulations, no guidelines, no restraints. And as a democract, I'm going to oppose that too. Without structure, all buildings fall, and you're not the only foreman with a clipboard, if I can muddle the analogy. Reform is just another attempt, going back to the BNP from my youth and the Blackshirts from yours, which ultimately fail the way they always fail. Britain embraces tradition but always rejects extremism. Britain protects its history and always looks forward. The kids are alright because they've grown up to respect a much broader world than the one you wish to impose. But what is 'extremism'? Is it forcing people out of their cars? Is it unlimited immigration and it's effects - high house prices, downward pressure on wages, overstretched public services? Is it the coronavirus BS with it's attendant job losses, money printing, diminution of savings, high house prices, loss of civil liberties? Is it attacks on free speech and a proposed blasphemy law? It's the old parties that, deep down, know they are extreme - to the extent that they hope to get through an election by avoiding these issues. Yet Reform raises these issues...and the old parties say it is extreme to do so. So who is really extreme? |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 3, 2024 9:53:31 GMT
I'm an open minded, broad minded, middle aged homosexual, of course I'm going to oppose small minded, blinkered, negative conservatism. That's how it works, Carlton. I'm not a Nationalist, I've seen what nationalism really means, and I'm correct it wanting it restrained and controlled. What you want is Trumpian/Bannonite revolution, as sadly evidenced by the Supreme Court rulings against Chevron last week, and immunity this week: no administrative state, no checks, no regulations, no guidelines, no restraints. And as a democract, I'm going to oppose that too. Without structure, all buildings fall, and you're not the only foreman with a clipboard, if I can muddle the analogy. Reform is just another attempt, going back to the BNP from my youth and the Blackshirts from yours, which ultimately fail the way they always fail. Britain embraces tradition but always rejects extremism. Britain protects its history and always looks forward. The kids are alright because they've grown up to respect a much broader world than the one you wish to impose. That is a good response Dok and carefully expressed. I reject it of course. If we keep up discussing things in this relatively calm manner I might have to ask for full access to the forum! |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jul 3, 2024 15:34:04 GMT
Democracy dies when people become alienated from it and stop getting involved, not due to wokeism or extremism. Most of the times democracy has died in a country have been due to foreign conquest or a violent coup (whether from the military or from revolutionaries). But in the other cases it's usually a combination of alienation and extremism. In particular, the public expressed their alienation by voting in extremist parties rather than by just staying at home and letting the non-alienated people vote in a status quo party. Where you are completely right is that alienation is more important than extremism, since people who haven't been raised to believe in an extremist ideology rarely adopt one unless they've already become alienated. |
|
|
|
Post by stodge on Jul 7, 2024 10:25:39 GMT
James Asser got home by 9,250 with his vote share falling from 70% to 45%. Sophia Naqvi for the Newham Independents got 20% but I know the Newham Independents put a lot more effort into this seat than East Ham and I think they may just have hit the glass ceiling of pro-Palestine support.
The Greens were again third going from 2.5% to 11% and now look the principal opposition to Labour in the future. The Conservative got 10% in fourth but Reform did better polling 8% in fifth - the constituency has a larger WWC element down around Silvertown and the Docks and the late defection of the candidate to the Conservatives made little or no difference.
|
|
