The Leftfield Stage back for 2010

[MEGABOWL]

I suppose if you listen to what the media tell you, then yeah you're right.

[llcoolphil]

???? The media are the ones who are constantly, erroneously referring to them as 'lefties' when in fact the vast majority of their policy has been centre-right, big-business friendly, and free-market capitalist

[-pogo-]

???? The media are the ones who are constantly, erroneously referring to them as 'lefties' when in fact the vast majority of their policy has been centre-right, big-business friendly, and free-market capitalist

[llcoolphil]

Recently, in a selection of news medias, yes. But from 1997 until a couple of months ago they were described as the party who "lost their morals", etc etc media rhetoric. The media don't refer to their more left leaning policies, and the things that are seen to "harm" big buisness are described as "ridiculous" rather than left wing, which is why some don't believe things like the Min Wage is a left wing policy, or the extra funding to the NHS.

I'm hardly party loyal in the strictest sense, but it's nice to know you forget the posts where I criticise Labour. I'm too trot to be a moderate, and too moderate to be a trot.

[-pogo-]

Media rhetoric my arse - the fact that the party has lost half its membership whilst in government should tell you that.

You are the most party loyal poster on here. By a mile. And despite the fact the party doesn't actually represent that many of your views.

[DreadlockDan]

You are the most party loyal poster on here. By a mile. And despite the fact the party doesn't actually represent that many of your views.

[eFestivals]

I get the feeling the same could be said of most people and the parties they vote for?

I agree.

And that's why we need a new voting system, where there's more opportunity to cast a meaningful vote for a party that better reflects the views of voters.

[Wooderson]

I agree.

And that's why we need a new voting system, where there's more opportunity to cast a meaningful vote for a party that better reflects the views of voters.

[Tugger2k]

I'm quite interested to hear your ideas of how this new system would function. Youre not referring to proportional representation are you?

[marktea]

Yes I appreciate the different voting system - but it is entirely related to the point you are making. What you are proposing is that nothing ever changes because nobody ever has the courage to vote outside the two main parties. The state of British politics right now means there has never been a better opportunity to meaningfully register a protest next May - by voting outside the main two parties. There are other issues too.

If 50 people vote for the Green Party next may, there is no need for any other party to consider green issues - thetre is clearly no votes in it. If 1,000,000 people vote Green next May, every party has to sit up and take notice because it is clearly an important issue. Unless that million is concentrated in Brighton (and possibly Norwich), that wont win the Greens a parliamentary seat - but it sends a hell of a message to the main parties.

If enough people vote how they really want to, we can usurp the main parties refusal to implement electoral reform. Ive been saying it for a year on these forums and will keep saying it - a hung parliament is a very real possibility next may. It becomes less of a possibility if people keep suggesting that a vote outside the main two parties is a wated vote. It isn't.

[-pogo-]

PR is realy a champion for your second "I guess that'll have to do" choice.

[eFestivals]

I'm quite interested to hear your ideas of how this new system would function. Youre not referring to proportional representation are you?

Yup.

It means that every vote is meaningful, and because of that it becomes worth voting for a party other than the main ones which might better reflect a person's views that those main parties.

The system as it is makes a person likely to vote against the party they dislike the most of the three main parties rather than vote for a party they actually in-the-main agree with - it's the only way currently that a person can make their vote in any way meaningful.

PR is not perfect; no system is. But it's more perfect than what we currently have, as the make-up of the national parliament will better match the views of the people of the country as a whole.

[llcoolphil]

What you say in the first bold passage misrepresents my view with the consequence that you are still missing the point. I certainly do not say anything about the courage of voters for minority parties. Everyone needs to vote and if people choose to vote on principle for a minority party then good for them. However, they should do it with their eyes open.

Take the two issues that you raise concerning the likelihood of a hung parliament and the effect of voting for the Greens. If we are to have a hung parliament the reality is that it will only be because the Lib Dems (or, if we are really unlucky, the Ulster Unionists) hold the balance of power. For anyone who would like the Lib Dems to hold sway, tactical voting cannot be ignored. To take your example; in many parts of the country the effect of voting at a general election for the Green party, if it has any impact at all, is likely to be to make it harder for Lib Dems in particular to win seats. That in turn makes it even less likely that we will achieve the hung parliament that might lead to electoral reform.

Likewise, in a number of constituencies a vote for the Lib Dems will facilitate a Conservative win and a vote for UKIP will facilitate a Labour or Lib Dem win. People need to be alive to this - its how our current system works.

So yes its wrong to suggest that a vote outside the two main parties is a wasted vote (and I don't suggest that). But a principled vote that fails to take into account the tactical considerations in any given constituency certainly can be a wasted vote - and even a counter-productive one. To say otherwise is simply misleading.

[eFestivals]

PR is realy a champion for your second "I guess that'll have to do" choice.

First Past The Post achieves that far far more - after all, we currently get a govt with absolute power yet who receive much below a majority of the votes. So the vast majority vote for their supposed first choice (which isn't necessarily really their first choice) yet end up being dictatorial ruled over by a party that wasn't their first choice.

PR ensures that the make up of parliament reflects the make up of the views in the country. The only 'democratic' reason reject that idea is if you want the party you support to have dictatorial power -which isn't anyway democratic.

The anti-PR people will say "it's a system that doesn't work - just look at Italy". I say to them just look at Germany - and Italy - which have both hugely out-performed the UK economically for the past 60+ years.

[CrispyRed]

There's been some inspiring and thought provoking debate going on in this thread which is wonderful and I would expect that most if not all those who have contributed or have read with these debates with interest would agree that we need the Leftfield back in 2010 if only for a forum for similar debate.

However, what we all seem powerless to do is ensure its return to the festival for as I pointed out in an earlier post - there will be no return of the Leftfield next year.

[russycarps]

There's been some inspiring and thought provoking debate going on in this thread which is wonderful and I would expect that most if not all those who have contributed or have read with these debates with interest would agree that we need the Leftfield back in 2010 if only for a forum for similar debate.

However, what we all seem powerless to do is ensure its return to the festival for as I pointed out in an earlier post - there will be no return of the Leftfield next year.

[CrispyRed]

thing is mate, none of us believe you.

No offence