FAO egb

Keepitgreen

Hanover Frederick Castle Radge
Private Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Alright dude, a couple of weeks back you responded to a thread I posted about the Lib Dems - I'd managed to read it prior to my net dying but didn't get a chance to respond before I was cutoff.

Anyway instead of digging out the old one I thought I'd answer here.

Basically I was stating my excitement at their surge more because of what it represented rather than what they represented in particular. Don't get me wrong, I agree with a number of their policies (electoral reform, the 10K tax change) and I think a few are simply laughable ( e.g. how are these immigrants going to prove they've been here 10 years?)

Like so many in the country I have been exhausted with the Labour/Tory power struggles of the past few decades and have long wanted a Third Way to try and represent more of what I believe in. No party will ever do this perfectly (unless I start my own - KiG Mentalists?) but it's fair to say that the LibDems will have more of a mandate for the new generation of voters than either of the established two, who have their unbreakable ties with outdated idealogy. I realise the Liberals are as old as the hills themselves but since they were frozen out of government, ridiculed and forgotten for so long, they will appreciate this voter surge more than either of the other two ever could. They will listen, precisely because they have to listen; they'll be dropped back into the abyss the second people think they've forgotten who put them there. That's a key difference from Labour and Tory.

I've read at length your repeated accusations at how New Labour morphed into something altogether different from the party they were supposed to be, not representing the people they were supposed to represent. Could you see then, a LibDem movement more closely representing the views of those Labour left behind? If not, why not?
 
Alright dude, a couple of weeks back you responded to a thread I posted about the Lib Dems - I'd managed to read it prior to my net dying but didn't get a chance to respond before I was cutoff.

Anyway instead of digging out the old one I thought I'd answer here.

Basically I was stating my excitement at their surge more because of what it represented rather than what they represented in particular. Don't get me wrong, I agree with a number of their policies (electoral reform, the 10K tax change) and I think a few are simply laughable ( e.g. how are these immigrants going to prove they've been here 10 years?)

Like so many in the country I have been exhausted with the Labour/Tory power struggles of the past few decades and have long wanted a Third Way to try and represent more of what I believe in. No party will ever do this perfectly (unless I start my own - KiG Mentalists?) but it's fair to say that the LibDems will have more of a mandate for the new generation of voters than either of the established two, who have their unbreakable ties with outdated idealogy. I realise the Liberals are as old as the hills themselves but since they were frozen out of government, ridiculed and forgotten for so long, they will appreciate this voter surge more than either of the other two ever could. They will listen, precisely because they have to listen; they'll be dropped back into the abyss the second people think they've forgotten who put them there. That's a key difference from Labour and Tory.

I've read at length your repeated accusations at how New Labour morphed into something altogether different from the party they were supposed to be, not representing the people they were supposed to represent. Could you see then, a LibDem movement more closely representing the views of those Labour left behind? If not, why not?
No I cannot. I think they represent the people that New Labour was aimed at; middle class liberals.

I honestly cannot see what any party married to liberal values (social and / or economic) can offer to labour's traditional base in the context of a global market.

How can you possibly say to people; "we are for you" when you support a model that sees their jobs transferred overseas or their wages deflated at home due to mass movement of labour.

And that's to say nothing of the effects of social liberalism; which are nice for those who can afford the alimony, the therapists couch and the nanny, but are an unmitigated disaster for poorer communities, leaving them trapped in a cycle of dependence.