this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
49 points (98.0% liked)

UK Politics

3113 readers
342 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Yes. And a constitution, with proper separation of powers.

[–] ReCursing@lemmings.world 16 points 22 hours ago

Keep the pressure on and maybe we can get this to a second vote before it;s quietly shelved this time!

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 15 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

"symbolic" being the key word.

This won't lead to anything.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 15 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I wish Brexit was a symbolic vote.

[–] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 9 points 19 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -2 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

But what would be the point of having a referendum, getting the results and then just saying "oh right, that's interesting" and doing nothing?

[–] frazorth 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What would be the point of having a referendum and deciding that 51% was enough to burn it all without a plan?

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The stupidity of politicians is not a reason to ignore what people vote for.

[–] frazorth 2 points 6 hours ago

I didn't say ignore the vote. Your reading comprehension is atrocious.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Let me think... Possibly because it was based on lies, manipulation and the significant part of the UK residents were disenfranchised?

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Who was disenfranchised? It was the biggest democratic vote in the UK's history, if I recall correctly.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Just three million of EU citizens in the UK and hundreds of thousands of UK citizens in the EU.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

They can't vote in general elections either.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Your point is? They live in the UK, pay taxes here - and by the way, they were able to vote in Scottish Independence referendum.

I would like to see Tories if SNP were to exclude English voters from the independence vote.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I would like to see Tories if SNP were to exclude English voters from the independence vote.

That would be denying UK citizens a right to vote in a UK referendum, so that's not even close to the same thing.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 33 minutes ago
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 9 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

All of the Conservatives who voted, 78 of them, opposed the idea

I'm mildly surprised by that, since FPTP actively hurt them at the last election.

[–] Ross_audio@lemmy.world 10 points 19 hours ago

It might have lost the party the election

But the rich party donors don't actually mind their party losing as long as they also control the second party well enough to avoid regulations, taxes, or any modicum of responsibility towards society.

FPTP isn't about which party wins, it's about reducing the power of the electorate far enough that change only happens with the content of the rich.

[–] Rogue 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

It's only temporary. Once they've bribed farage sufficiently he'll disband the reform party and the tories will return to dominating elections through the corruption of FPTP. The absurd thing is Labour refuse to accept this and will blunder on refusing to accept we need a proportional electoral system

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Labour have just won a 174 seat majority on 34% of the vote with FPTP.

There would be no benefit to them in changing the system.

[–] Rogue 1 points 7 hours ago

In my opinion labour's victory was due to the utter incompetence of the conservatives and unexpected success of the reform party. I don't believe these circumstances will be repeated so labour will get demolished as usual in the next election. The same applies to the lib dems getting 70 seats under FPTP. It won't be repeated so they must work together to repair the damn system

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Oh, there is. There is no guarantee this will be repeated.

[–] mannycalavera 3 points 20 hours ago

Yeah but they'd get fucked with PR.

Labour less so but they would still prefer FPTP over PR for party reasons. And without one or both of these large groups nothing will change. 😞