Corbynomics: A Dystopia

CLAPTON

Southend1 wrote: »

Does the current government have a democratic mandate to run the country then, given that almost two thirds of the votes cast were against the Conservatives, without even counting the proportion of eligible voters who abstained - only 24% of the total electorate actually voted for the Conservatives.

If it was proposed that parliamentary elections be carried out with the same thresholds as proposed for industrial action ballots, no politician would support it. Why then should working people be subjected to these draconian rules which would prevent them from protecting their rights?

clearly the voting result of a simple yes/no voting system is quite different from a vote where there are 5 -10 different outcomes (as in a general election with many candidates.

I think that we do need to consider changing how the general elections work.

However that has little to do with how a simple strike / no strike ballot should work

what exactly is draconic about saying 50% of eligible people for a strike/no strike should vote in favour?

Thrugelmir

Southend1 wrote: »

Does the current government have a democratic mandate to run the country then, given that almost two thirds of the votes cast were against the Conservatives, without even counting the proportion of eligible voters who abstained - only 24% of the total electorate actually voted for the Conservatives.

If it was proposed that parliamentary elections be carried out with the same thresholds as proposed for industrial action ballots, no politician would support it. Why then should working people be subjected to these draconian rules which would prevent them from protecting their rights?

The tone of your posts is so 1950's. The Unions (internally) need to modernise. I'll leave it at that. Hopefully this thread will be consigned to the MoneySaversArms where it belongs.

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The tone of your posts is so 1950's. The Unions (internally) need to modernise. I'll leave it at that. Hopefully this thread will be consigned to the MoneySaversArms where it belongs.

The thread was meant to be about economics. One poster has decided to derail it so it is now about the 'rights' of Trade Unions.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

The thread was meant to be about economics. One poster has decided to derail it so it is now about the 'rights' of Trade Unions.

do the Corbynites actually have any economic (or indeed any other) policies we can debate?

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

do the Corbynites actually have any economic (or indeed any other) policies we can debate?

It depends when you ask. Some days they do, some days they don't.

Southend1

I thought this thread was for debating the Labour party's economic policies? One of which is to oppose the trade union bill. Or are we only allowed to debate as long as we're all on the neoliberal side of the fence?

Generali

Southend1 wrote: »

I thought this thread was for debating the Labour party's economic policies? One of which is to oppose the trade union bill. Or are we only allowed to debate as long as we're all on the neoliberal side of the fence?

You're perfectly at liberty to carry on being wrong. It's a bit harsh to write me off as a neoliberal. I prefer to think of myself as a European libertarian.

Southend1

Generali wrote: »

You're perfectly at liberty to carry on being wrong.

Well I suppose if that's the standard of debate around here it's best we don't attempt to continue!

antrobus

Southend1 wrote: »

Does the current government have a democratic mandate to run the country then, given that almost two thirds of the votes cast were against the Conservatives, without even counting the proportion of eligible voters who abstained - only 24% of the total electorate actually voted for the Conservatives.....QUOTE]

Apparently, yes. At least they have more of a mandate than the Labour government of 2005-2010 which only had the support of 21.6% of the electorate.:)

Southend1

antrobus wrote: »

Southend1 wrote: »

Does the current government have a democratic mandate to run the country then, given that almost two thirds of the votes cast were against the Conservatives, without even counting the proportion of eligible voters who abstained - only 24% of the total electorate actually voted for the Conservatives.....QUOTE]

Apparently, yes. At least they have more of a mandate than the Labour government of 2005-2010 which only had the support of 21.6% of the electorate.:)

So if we agree on that, then why should such stringent turnout requirements apply to trade union democracy when it doesn't apply in politics?

Turnout in the 2012 police and crime commissioner elections was 15%!