UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Alcibiades]

Between the abolition of the death penalty and some time in the 90s, there was an attempt in every Parliament to reintroduce the death penalty, all of which obviously failed.

Unfortunately withdrawal from the EU may embolden some Tories to try again, and it’s never been a secret that Priti Patel is a fan of executions, but I seriously doubt there exists anywhere near to a majority in either Parliament or the court of public opinion to pull it off (not to mention its current illegality under the ECHR, which is not linked to EU membership).

[Alcibiades]

There are some signs that the outbreak might have peaked in London and the SE, where the new variant first emerged. Of course still growing rapidly in the rest of the country, but I do think that by mid-February things will be significantly better.

[Alcibiades]

It does seem the UK lockdown is slightly looser than New Zealand's level 4 lockdown, though it's close to it. We didn't have takeaways under level 4, and bakeries, butchers and greengrocers could only do contactless delivery, so it was just supermarkets and dairies. Playgrounds even were closed, which I suppose could be a 'pandemic theatre' measure (if the R number of the new variant doesn't go below 1, the measures might just need to get really harsh though). I'm not sure how strict the UK's travel restrictions are. I know we couldn't go to a neighbouring suburb for walks, so had to stay within our own area (except when going to the supermarket or when doing socially distanced check ins on those within our support bubble). Maybe the UK would need to look even further though, Spain seemed to go really hard in their first lockdown. The problem with the UK government's approach is they've always been more afraid of the risks of their actions than the risks of inaction and so dithered. Just play it safe for once and take precautionary measures that might be unnecessary rather than again regretting it after tens of thousands of lives have been lost.

It’s hard to thing of many more meaningful measures that could be taken to make the lockdown harsher, and I haven’t seen anyone suggesting it isn’t restrictive enough. For now, I don’t think there’s any reason to think that this won’t have a real impact on driving cases down to a level manageable for the health service.

[Alcibiades]

Cases now pretty clearly on the decline. Deaths as ever remain a lagging indicator, so sadly they may continue to rise in the coming days. But the good news is we should be in a much better position by February.

For all that the government has done wrong, credit where credit’s due that they seem to be handling the vaccine rollout pretty well, and are on track to meet the target of all over-70s and clinically vulnerable people jabbed by mid-February.

[Alcibiades]

I guess "Scottish Nationalist Party" is to Conservatives what "Democrat Party" is to Republicans.

Correct.  Both are a bit silly in my opinion but both achieve their desired reaction.

The SNP one actually makes sense by linking them to a generally right-wing ideology. The ‘Democrat Party’ thing is just totally inane.

[Alcibiades]

I mean, the UK is still bizarrely centralised for such a large and regionally diverse country, so I’m not sure even more (re-)centralisation is the way to go. Federalism doesn’t seem to work too badly for Germany or Switzerland. By the way, if you want to reduce the SNP’s influence in a legitimate, democratic manner, get rid of FPTP, which allows them to win 80% of Scottish Westminster seats on 45% of the vote.

[Alcibiades]

I mean, the UK is still bizarrely centralised for such a large and regionally diverse country, so I’m not sure even more (re-)centralisation is the way to go. Federalism doesn’t seem to work too badly for Germany or Switzerland. By the way, if you want to reduce the SNP’s influence in a legitimate, democratic manner, get rid of FPTP, which allows them to win 80% of Scottish Westminster seats on 45% of the vote.

It's never a bad moment to do that.

Of course last time you tried to do that it was rejected everywhere outside of Inner London, Central Edinburgh, Central Glasgow and Oxbridge... though I am not sure whether AV would change the seat distribution in Scotland that much unless there's a heck of a Unionist tactical vote?
As a slight aside, is proportional representation perceived as, ahem, un-British in the UK?

I think someone ran the number and concluded that AV would have delivered an even less proportional result in one of the recent elections, although I think it is marginally more democratic than FPTP because each constituency MP would have to get majority support. I don’t think most people have strong feelings either way on PR, but I think it would get rejected in a referendum because most people would stick with the devil they know. The AV proposal was defeated so heavily because it was turned into a referendum on the deeply unpopular Nick Clegg.

[Alcibiades]

I mean, the UK is still bizarrely centralised for such a large and regionally diverse country, so I’m not sure even more (re-)centralisation is the way to go. Federalism doesn’t seem to work too badly for Germany or Switzerland. By the way, if you want to reduce the SNP’s influence in a legitimate, democratic manner, get rid of FPTP, which allows them to win 80% of Scottish Westminster seats on 45% of the vote.

It's never a bad moment to do that.

Of course last time you tried to do that it was rejected everywhere outside of Inner London, Central Edinburgh, Central Glasgow and Oxbridge... though I am not sure whether AV would change the seat distribution in Scotland that much unless there's a heck of a Unionist tactical vote?
As a slight aside, is proportional representation perceived as, ahem, un-British in the UK?

I think someone ran the number and concluded that AV would have delivered an even less proportional result in one of the recent elections, although I think it is marginally more democratic than FPTP because each constituency MP would have to get majority support. I don’t think most people have strong feelings either way on PR, but I think it would get rejected in a referendum because most people would stick with the devil they know. The AV proposal was defeated so heavily because it was turned into a referendum on the deeply unpopular Nick Clegg.

I am aware of that. Not unusual for these things to turn into a referendum on [insert unpopular politician here], like our 2016 Constitutional referendum which failed mostly because people wanted to stick a middle finger to Renzi.
I find the debacle that happened to the Lib Dems in that period quite tragicomic. It halved its support in the polls in, like, eight months?

It is a common phenomenon around the world that junior coalition partners are punished at the next election, but the Lib Dems’ case was particularly brutal.

I know that this is a very unpopular stance to take these days, but I am a bit of a Clegg apologist. While I think the coalition negotiations could have been handled better, in particular pushing harder for constitutional reform, in reality, and without hindsight, the results of the 2010 election left him with no real choice but to enter coalition with the Tories (and one can also argue that it is the duty of a political party to their voters to try to the best of their ability to implement their manifesto, and thus to enter government if they can). While the tuition fees thing was a complete fiasco, the Lib Dems did do a lot of important and under-appreciated work to curb the worst excesses of Tory austerity. In this respect, it is a tragic tale.

[Alcibiades]

I mean, the UK is still bizarrely centralised for such a large and regionally diverse country, so I’m not sure even more (re-)centralisation is the way to go. Federalism doesn’t seem to work too badly for Germany or Switzerland. By the way, if you want to reduce the SNP’s influence in a legitimate, democratic manner, get rid of FPTP, which allows them to win 80% of Scottish Westminster seats on 45% of the vote.

It's never a bad moment to do that.

Of course last time you tried to do that it was rejected everywhere outside of Inner London, Central Edinburgh, Central Glasgow and Oxbridge... though I am not sure whether AV would change the seat distribution in Scotland that much unless there's a heck of a Unionist tactical vote?
As a slight aside, is proportional representation perceived as, ahem, un-British in the UK?

I think someone ran the number and concluded that AV would have delivered an even less proportional result in one of the recent elections, although I think it is marginally more democratic than FPTP because each constituency MP would have to get majority support. I don’t think most people have strong feelings either way on PR, but I think it would get rejected in a referendum because most people would stick with the devil they know. The AV proposal was defeated so heavily because it was turned into a referendum on the deeply unpopular Nick Clegg.

I am aware of that. Not unusual for these things to turn into a referendum on [insert unpopular politician here], like our 2016 Constitutional referendum which failed mostly because people wanted to stick a middle finger to Renzi.
I find the debacle that happened to the Lib Dems in that period quite tragicomic. It halved its support in the polls in, like, eight months?

It is a common phenomenon around the world that junior coalition partners are punished at the next election, but the Lib Dems’ case was particularly brutal.

I know that this is a very unpopular stance to take these days, but I am a bit of a Clegg apologist. While I think the coalition negotiations could have been handled better, in particular pushing harder for constitutional reform, in reality, and without hindsight, the results of the 2010 election left him with no real choice but to enter coalition with the Tories (and one can also argue that it is the duty of a political party to their voters to try to the best of their ability to implement their manifesto, and thus to enter government if they can). While the tuition fees thing was a complete fiasco, the Lib Dems did do a lot of important and under-appreciated work to curb the worst excesses of Tory austerity. In this respect, it is a tragic tale.

Of course the Lib Dems had a choice. They could have gone into a confidence and supply agreement or some other informal arrangement where they don't allow the parliament to dissolve (this is pre-FTPA days) but still prevent the Tories from enacting the worst of their ideas.*

I used to be sympathetic to the argument that the Lib Dems did the best they could with a weak hand, but the effectiveness of the DUP in hamstringing the Tories' Brexit 'plans' (lol) from 2017-2019 shows that an even smaller caucus could be even more impactful when played right. Clegg lacked the political nous and sheer ruthlessness Foster demonstrated. Allowing the AV referendum to get watered down, undercut by the Tory part of the coalition, and scheduled when it was is a case in point.

*As a side note, Clegg's, and the LD's more generally, conceit of getting into government to 'deliver on the manifesto' or curb the worst of Tory excesses looks in retrospect more and more a cover for wanting access to the trappings of office and patronage/sinecures.

I didn’t mean to say that Clegg’s political instincts were underrated, but rather that I don’t agree with the notion that he was a covert ‘Yellow Tory’ eager to enact sweeping austerity. As for your last point, well yes, but I don’t really see how you can separate those two points as a motive for entering government.

[Alcibiades]

The Guardian is reporting that Labour strategists plan to make the party’s branding and messaging more “patriotic” (e.g. making prominent use of Union flags in their imagery) to win back the fabled “Red Wall” seats.

Personally, I find this kind of thing somewhat sickening, especially coming from the left-of-centre (and if they went overboard with it, it would make up my mind to vote Lib Dem if I felt both had an equal chance of winning my constituency), but I suppose I can’t complain if this does actually help to break the Tory majority (which I’m not sure either way if it will), and it doesn’t translate into actual policy.

This also got me thinking again about Gordon Brown’s encounter with the “bigoted woman”. I view it as a truly tragic moment in British politics, not because of how it may or may not have affected that general election, but because cemented it being taboo to dismiss concerns about “mass immigration” as being scapegoating not grounded in economic reality.

[Alcibiades]

This also got me thinking again about Gordon Brown’s encounter with the “bigoted woman”. I view it as a truly tragic moment in British politics, not because of how it may or may not have affected that general election, but because cemented it being taboo to dismiss concerns about “mass immigration” as being scapegoating not grounded in economic reality.

Honestly my perception is that this moment has become much more important in hindsight (past few years) than it was considered at the time.

As for patriotism...

https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1356710844894167046?s=19

Fair point, but that was before English nationalism was such a mainstream force. I appreciate if they’re trying to reclaim these symbols as those of a proud, tolerant Britain, as happened in the 90s with the Union Jack, after its association with the National Front and football hooligans throughout the 80s, but I fear that is not the case.

[Alcibiades]

What do you fear is the case?

That this leaked strategy is not attempting to use this imagery to define a positive, inclusive, non-nationalistic British patriotism, but rather will cede more ground to the Tory position on English nationalism and immigration.

[Alcibiades]

This also got me thinking again about Gordon Brown’s encounter with the “bigoted woman”. I view it as a truly tragic moment in British politics, not because of how it may or may not have affected that general election, but because cemented it being taboo to dismiss concerns about “mass immigration” as being scapegoating not grounded in economic reality.

Honestly my perception is that this moment has become much more important in hindsight (past few years) than it was considered at the time.

It's often forgotten that Rochdale was a Labour gain in 2010, so it didn't even have an impact locally. The mythologising of the incident really got going as part of the 2010 Labour leadership election, for reasons that in retrospect had little to do with national electoral politics.

Was this due to changing boundaries? Otherwise I'd be really curious as to how they picked up that seat in a year they were losing nearly 100 seats.

Well they gained it from a Lib Dem who had only won by 400 votes in 2005, so it’s not hard to see why they might have won it, especially as the Lib Dems also lost seats in 2010 and their performances are often based on highly localised factors. The boundary changes did result in a notional Labour seat under 2005 numbers, but this wasn’t necessarily the be-all and end-all of it.

[Alcibiades]

Brexit meaning "normal" political rules didn't apply was at least as significant tbh.

And the utterly uncritical, at times deranged, support of almost the entire media in 2019 especially.

No argument on that last point. Groupthink is one helluva drug, but Tory/Oxbridge/City/media groupthink is a whole other level.

Sadly, I'm not sure Brexit's alteration of the 'normal' political rules was a temporary feature. If anything, the fact that leaving the EU ended up being the prevailing position has instantiated its assumptions and political biases even further.

I think this is a good point. Even though Brexit’s done and dusted (for the moment) Labour are still in a difficult spot. Talking about rejoining the EU is out of the question for the next few years, but Labour have an electorate that is fundamentally Remain-voting (in 2019, Labour Remainers outnumbered Labour Leavers 3 to 1), and has only got more so. Even in many of the Brexit-voting Northern working class seats, the majority of Labour voters clearly voted Remain. Labour need to tread a fine line between not dredging up an issue which most of the electorate wants to move on from, but also not being too positive about Brexit.

[Alcibiades]

Brexit meaning "normal" political rules didn't apply was at least as significant tbh.

And the utterly uncritical, at times deranged, support of almost the entire media in 2019 especially.

No argument on that last point. Groupthink is one helluva drug, but Tory/Oxbridge/City/media groupthink is a whole other level.

Sadly, I'm not sure Brexit's alteration of the 'normal' political rules was a temporary feature. If anything, the fact that leaving the EU ended up being the prevailing position has instantiated its assumptions and political biases even further.

I think this is a good point. Even though Brexit’s done and dusted (for the moment) Labour are still in a difficult spot. Talking about rejoining the EU is out of the question for the next few years, but Labour have an electorate that is fundamentally Remain-voting (in 2019, Labour Remainers outnumbered Labour Leavers 3 to 1), and has only got more so. Even in many of the Brexit-voting Northern working class seats, the majority of Labour voters clearly voted Remain. Labour need to tread a fine line between not dredging up an issue which most of the electorate wants to move on from, but also not being too positive about Brexit.

A majority of Remain voters supported Labour voting for the Brexit deal.

No-one who isn't on FBPE Twitter will be voting on Labour's position on Europe in 2024. Even the Lib Dems have backed away from wanting to rejoin.

Of course Brexit will not be a major issue in 2024, and there is very little appetite for re-opening a discussion on Britain’s relationship with the EU. However, the Tories will inevitably frequently bring up what they see as the resounding successes of Brexit; Labour will have to respond carefully to this.

[Alcibiades]

https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1360309462796500995

I do wonder if the Greens will be able to get a breakthrough in the next election (I don’t know if 7% necessarily counts as one, but it would be a very good result for them - the unknown factor is obviously how that would translates into seats). This is a pattern we’ve been seeing across Europe, although the UK’s circumstances are obviously different - firstly, the UK Greens have a less moderate reputation than say, the German Greens, and secondly, there is the matter of FPTP.

[Alcibiades]

Leeds made much more sense... the types of people working at senior levels would be more likely to live in the city or surrounding area.

All Darlington does is create another commuter link while the poorly paid staff will be local.

I suppose the thinking was that Leeds is too large of a city with a fairly vibrant economy. That, and Darlington is a 2019 Tory gain which borders Sunak’s constituency. Anyway, I agree, a pointless move all round.

[Alcibiades]

I mean, FPTP is essentially indefensible from an intellectual perspective, and it only persists out of inertia and its blatant self-propagating nature (i.e. governments which get power through FPTP are not going to want to abolish it) in this country. I suppose you could make a practical argument, but is the UK’s politics actually less dysfunctional than Germany’s or Scandinavia’s?

[Alcibiades]

Although, to be fair, while Rentoul’s way of putting it is rather odd, the Dyson affair was never going to be the most damaging of the many stories which have recently emerged about the PM. Labour would do better to focus on the others.

[Alcibiades]

2019 was the first general election since 1959 where Labour’s seat percentage was lower than their vote percentage. Based on Labour’s current coalition, FPTP is reasonably likely to continue to disadvantage them, as their votes are reasonably packed; there are lots of seats where they get above 60%, but far fewer where the Tories do the same.

[Alcibiades]

On the Martin Bashir/Diana thing, I do think that much of the coverage of it is slightly unfair (although entirely predictable from the Tory side). Yes, the BBC clearly failed here, but let’s not pretend that it is anywhere near this country’s biggest problem as far as dishonest journalism is concerned. It is quite possible that the Beeb will end up suffering greater consequences for this than the Murdoch press and tabloids ever did for phone-hacking.

[Alcibiades]

The pandemic is over - the disease in now endemic in the UK but that ultimately doesn’t matter because we can now combat it with vaccines. 60% of the UK population (including children) have had at least one dose of the vaccine, that’ll probably rise to about 66% by June 21st based on the current pace of vaccinations. Nearly all of the most vulnerable groups have now had their two vaccines. It’s Summer. There’s no evidence that the “Indian” or any other variant has the ability to evade the vaccine in any significant way. It’s over and it’s time to return to normal.

Exactly - cases may continue to ebb and flow for a bit, but there’s no reason to think that there will ever again be a serious spike in deaths or hospitalisations.

[Alcibiades]

Yeah, I can’t really bring myself to be that worked up about masks. They’re about the least inconvenient measure possible.

[Alcibiades]

Can we expect a England beats Germany boost for Boris?

I wonder if Wilson’s government became more popular in polls after 66

England crashing out of the World Cup was supposedly a factor in Labour losing in 1970.

[Alcibiades]

That was a strange tweet from him, though maybe not quite as strange as Karen Buck's.

What did Karen Buck tweet?

An Ayn Rand quote…