Reply to: A hopeful start on the road to recovery for British politics

[The_Equalizer]

While we are on the subject, here is a classic from the Politics Show on Sunday:

Terry Christian on Labour

[milanbenes]

Oi! Gerroff my thread!

hmm,

who is this ?

Fiddle ? Xog ? would Xog have the energy make a socky ? Supremo, hmmm not sure he's so familiar with Latin

Milan.

[Doggy Styles]

'Liberal' now means whatever anyone wants it to mean, and has therefore become meaningless.

[Ignis Fatuus]

Oi! Gerroff my thread!

[milanbenes]

why oh why oh why,

does every government have to come with Change ?

Why not make what there is work ?

One of the greatest things the new ToryLiberal government has done is go about unwinding all of new lie's changes

Why not bring in a new government, and stop them from legislating and instead focus on making what there is work

Why new legislation on top of legislation, private members bills lotteries, it's like dreaming up legislation simply for the sake of legislation it's like some MP's consider it their greatest personal achievement to bring in a peace of legislation, what about going back to basics and talking to their electorate and helping their electorate with foundation principles like jobs, encouraging enterprise and engineering etc the foundations of an economy and stable democracy

Milan.

[sasguru]

However, I'm not an alcoholic. And yes I await the crap that will follow ... actually you're not worth my time ...

No sure you're not. And yes your time is better spent in the pub which you're dying to get to even now.
So go, what are you waiting for?

[Jeebo72]

Just saying like. You were pontificating about weakness yesterday and how the weak should be culled. Do you think being an alcoholic is weak (or week as you spell it)?

If there's one thing I can't stand it's hypocrisy.

However, I'm not an alcoholic. And yes I await the crap that will follow ... actually you're not worth my time ...

[sasguru]

Knew you would turn up with a comment. You can't let it go...

Just saying like. You were pontificating about weakness yesterday and how the weak should be culled. Do you think being an alcoholic is weak (or week as you spell it)?

If there's one thing I can't stand it's hypocrisy.

[Jeebo72]

Better check that you can get affordable health care in the country you go to. You'll need it.

Knew you would turn up with a comment. You can't let it go...

[sasguru]

Thankfully, by time Labour is next elected I’ll have enough money to leave the country.

Better check that you can get affordable health care in the country you go to. You'll need it.

[Ignis Fatuus]

I don't think your post count of 57 quite gives you carte blanche to come in here and ponificate like you're some CUK old sweat. And talk about pompous! Phew.

Look, Threaded, I've been here as long as you have

[gricerboy]

So would I. I dreamed of the Liberal Party that Jo Grimond described as a radical non-socialist left-wing alternative. That's what I would like to see: a non-dogmatic party committed to peacemeal social change for the better. Karl Popper's recipe (as implemented rather successfully by his student Helmut Schmidt): change a little and see if it works. If it's better, change a little bit more, if not, admit it and undo it. That is what is conspicuously lacking from both major parties, but at least the Labour Party at its best knows that change is needed, to make our country a better place. The Conservative Party too often seems not to be driven by principles (Margaret Thatcher apart, who clearly was driven by principle at least at first, but was in the end not so successful either in implementation of her principles or in effect of her practice, as people, including Lefties, often imagine).

BTW this forum is becoming worse than the Daily Mail - an achievement previously thought impossible - in the imposition of unthinking orthodoxy. Present another view and you are immediately accused of being a sockpuppet. Do any of you know the phrase argumentum ad hominem?

Actually some of you do and I could even tell you which of you. Oh for a board with only them

I don't think your post count of 57 quite gives you carte blanche to come in here and ponificate like you're some CUK old sweat. And talk about pompous! Phew.

[Ignis Fatuus]

I would rather like a proper classical liberal party to vote for. I would probably find myself in a small minority, but that doesn't bother me.

Here in Holland, liberalism is split between VVD, who are actually a deep conservative party masquerading as liberals, and D66, of which I am a member; unfortunately, seeing as D66 is filled with academics and high earners, it doesn't do well in selling the message of liberalism to the masses, so remains a party with no more than about 10% of the vote.

So would I. I dreamed of the Liberal Party that Jo Grimond described as a radical non-socialist left-wing alternative. That's what I would like to see: a non-dogmatic party committed to peacemeal social change for the better. Karl Popper's recipe (as implemented rather successfully by his student Helmut Schmidt): change a little and see if it works. If it's better, change a little bit more, if not, admit it and undo it. That is what is conspicuously lacking from both major parties, but at least the Labour Party at its best knows that change is needed, to make our country a better place. The Conservative Party too often seems not to be driven by principles (Margaret Thatcher apart, who clearly was driven by principle at least at first, but was in the end not so successful either in implementation of her principles or in effect of her practice, as people, including Lefties, often imagine).

BTW this forum is becoming worse than the Daily Mail - an achievement previously thought impossible - in the imposition of unthinking orthodoxy. Present another view and you are immediately accused of being a sockpuppet. Do any of you know the phrase argumentum ad hominem?

Actually some of you do and I could even tell you which of you. Oh for a board with only them

[Mich the Tester]

There are many different types of "liberal" - a social liberal would allow all sorts of nonsense/radical policies, an economic liberal would be very free-market.

I guess I'm a sort of libertarian; government intervention only where it is absolutely necessary, and with the only real aim to protect individual liberty. Sounds very idealistic, and indeed it is; liberalism starts splitting into different strands when confronted with reality; some liberals favour measures to develop material equality, arguing that one person cannot be truly free when another is desperately fighting for something to eat. Others favour measures to prevent the free economy doing to much damage to society. Others feel the government should just butt out and leave it all to individual initiative.

[MrMark]

I would rather like a proper classical liberal party to vote for. I would probably find myself in a small minority, but that doesn't bother me.

There are many different types of "liberal" - a social liberal would allow all sorts of nonsense/radical policies, an economic liberal would be very free-market.