this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
50 points (100.0% liked)

UK Politics

3067 readers
314 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The last paragraph just about sums it all up.

The choice is Labour’s, to go on trying to secure narrow, shallow and occasional FPTP victories on policies only acceptable to those who want nothing to change, especially on climate, or mobilise and build the progressive majority that exists in our country. Infrequent, weak single party government or strong progressive alliances most of the time? The flick of a switch in terms of how we count votes is a game changer for progressives and the planet.

I don't want a system that relies on the least worst option. This system is low hanging fruit for abusive regimes with a war chest to spend on campaigns.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hellothere@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago (11 children)

LFF yet again put the cart before the horse.

The problem, as they acknowledge, is that power is held in a minority of swing seats. It isn't only Labour and the Tories that benefit from this, but those voters as well.

But if Labour put voting reform in to their manifesto - and for it to be a day 1 issue they would have to - all it takes is for the Tories to run the sort of negative campaign we saw with the AV referendum, and every election since, in those swing seats for Labour to not win, and not be able to make the change.

The only route to electoral reform unfortunately seems to be a second Labour term. The theory being that it would be harder to run the sort of negative campaign the Tories would do, after a successful first term.

Or, via a coalition agreement, and instead of having a referendum - because parliament does not need one to decide how it's members are elected - just enact the reform.

If Labour put it in their 2024 manifesto, it would be too easily defeated.

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yeah not surprised with LFF. Lots of surface level commentary without substance. But absolutely agree with your analysis. I wish it wasn't the case that we have to wait even longer for electoral reform but the realist in me knows this needs to happen in the way you described.

I'll go further and say that whilst Labour are successful (two terms three terms whatever) this will also never happen. I don't have faith in them not to be sucked in again by power like the Tories have been. I think only a coalition can force the thing through.

[–] jamrom@feddit.uk 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People criticise Labour for dropping pledges, or not committing to bringing in proportional representation, during a cost of living crisis and a media war led by the right-wing press that's constantly distracting people with inflammatory rage bait about small boats and culture wars.

[–] hellothere@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Those people didn't learn the lesson of 2019; do not write a manifesto covering loads of seemingly disparate issues.

The cool kids in the room, of which I very much am one, understand the connection between voting systems and under-representation, because it was part of our initiation in to the cool kids club. Unfortunately most people have better things to do with their lives than study to pass that exam, so it isn't clear. It's a failure of the cool kids to communicate that connection simply and correctly.

Or to put it another way, electoral reform underpins everything, but it's feels both very abstract, and like the people who are promoting it are trying to change to rules of game, because they can't currently win. And tbh, there is a lot of truth in that, even if the current rules are massively unfair.

load more comments (8 replies)