very weak budget

bendix

chucky wrote: »

all the parties are very similar not in politics but the game that they play, to maintain themselves in power for as long as possible. it's a shame but it's what we've come to expect from politicians regardless from which party they are from.

Which is why I never bother to listen to the noise associated with minute policy point details, or nonsense about MPs expenses, or sex scandals, or Lord Mandelson's mortage loan. It's just hubbub and detracts from the real point - the philosophical premises behind a political party. All else is just clutter.

Getting into manifesto details or Daily Mail newsbites obliterates that clarity. It also leads to those irrational voting behaviours I alluded to before.

For me, the concept of a working class man voting Labour in ridiculous. The essence of Labour's philosophy is not to RAISE the working class man above and beyond his roots and to enable him to soar; Labour's philosophy is fundamentally to 'help' the working class man improve his conditions of being working class. It's to raise working class standards, NOT abolishing the class structure per se. In that regard, it's ANTI-working class and - more ironically - it's very conservative because it is almost saying: 'We can't break down these barriers, so instead we will help Joe the Plumber by making his working conditions better." It assumes a status quo. What is more reactionary than that.

Conservatism thinking, on the other hand, is about providing the freedom to Joe the Plumber to be anything he wants to be, on his own merits. In that regards, it's fundamentally classless. When you think about it, it's revolutionary.

Curiously, your typical Daily Mail conservative voter would be appalled at that notion.

Hence the irony and irrationality of those traditional working class / labour, middle class / tory allegiances.

The interesting thing is, the only politician in the last hundred years to get that was, of course Margaret Thatcher.

Christ, my head hurts now.

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Maybe thats because a high % of the working population were glad to have secure jobs and pensions.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I didn't say all.

so you haven't got any proof and it's a very big assumption on your part that a high percentage of public sector workers voted Labour.