Is the Democratic Party the most ideologically diverse in the world? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 12, 2024, 04:51:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Is the Democratic Party the most ideologically diverse in the world? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Is the Democratic Party the most ideologically diverse in the world?  (Read 5789 times)
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


« on: May 22, 2012, 12:14:06 PM »

No, PMBD, PRI in Mexico, the Congress Party and - as Nathan pointed out - most Japanese parties are more diverse than the US Democrats.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2012, 03:47:12 PM »

No one else is thinking of the Congress Party of India?
Yes. They were on my list.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2012, 04:48:56 PM »

in many ways they were the prelude to New Labour.

lolno

You basically had three groups of MPs who defected to the SDP: small 'l' liberal bourgeois Labour types who had given up entirely on the mother party, but who thought that the Liberal Party was a joke, Labour right-wingers who had fallen out with local Labour lefties and who wanted to recreate the Labour Party as it had been (in their memory anyway) twenty years earlier (almost all of these ended up rejoining Labour officially or in spirit some time after losing their seats), and the moronic careerist hacks who didn't really believe in anything and who miscalculated hee-lar-ree-oss-lee. On top of this, you have to add a large number of people outside (some of which were actually rather right-wing) who joined the SDP because the SDP were new and shiny and the other three parties were neither of those things.
Thats actually a pretty good dscription of New Labour Smiley
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2012, 05:13:16 PM »

Oh no, most of the important figures moved over from the Left  (including the Honourable Member for Sedgefield) and continued to think (and operate) accordingly. The SDP was totally rooted on the Right and was a reaction to internal political defeat. It wasn't a prelude to anything because the one direction that it did not (could not) look in was forwards.
Right wingers were only one of your three definitions. "Liberal bourgeois Labour types" fits a lot of them - including the Honourable Member for Sedgefield - spot on.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2012, 03:52:07 PM »

Right wingers were only one of your three definitions. "Liberal bourgeois Labour types" fits a lot of them - including the Honourable Member for Sedgefield - spot on.

In the World of the Labour Party before the split, 'liberal bourgeois types' were on the Right by definition.
Maybe, but we are talking about New Labour here. I was just pointing out, that your description of SDP fitted New Labour.

Blair is and always was the essence of "bourgeois Liberal" and the same goes for most of his crowd. Some may in the beginning have tried to style themselves as leftys, but they never truly where. Just upper middle class boys putting on an act.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 10 queries.