1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Conservative Party: Where do we go from here?

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Gigabit, Jun 10, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tony Edwards

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 4, 2018

    Posts: 3,372

    So Corbyn wants to raise 9bn from basicaly capital gains tax to spend on services and that is wrong. Yet Boris wants to take 9bn from the tax coffers to give to people that dont particularly need it if they are living within their means that is, just like the poor keep getting told to do and thats fine. What a horrible world we live in.
    That is the fault of the so called moderates. They got their knickers in a twist then threw their toys out. Despite being part of the shadow cabinet at the time. Go figure.
    Eh? What type of people.

    You must be talking about rich people then who dont want to pay taxes but still want to be able use the roads, police, doctors, street cleaners and other public services. Yeah that must be who you are talking about.
     
  2. efish

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 11, 2014

    Posts: 1,322

    Can we have you're thoughts on any positive contributions historical materialism has made to contemporary thought?
    Myopic bias is also a road to Trump. The ability to look at both sides of an argument is helpful way of getting past the Darth Vader v Luke Sky-walker school of history which is the central aspect of Trumps rhetorical style.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  3. Murphy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 16, 2018

    Posts: 2,432

    Yea but no, the definition is...
    And yes the other aspects that frequently get tagged on alongside it does make them part of it, in the same way as the other parts of conservatism that frequently get tagged on alongside it makes them part of it.

    Now certainly there's an argument to be made that the original theories did not include those aspect but if you're going to make that argument then we also have to make it for all other socioeconomic models of organising society, and for that matter every single word in the dictionary that has grown and changed to mean more than it's original definition, language grows and changes with society so stating that a word can't, or indeed must not, change from it's original meaning would be daft.
     
  4. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 64,245

    As I said it isn't any particular group of people, but individuals from all walks of life who aren't inclined to contribute whether they have the means currently or not.
     
  5. a1ex2001

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 14, 2005

    Posts: 11,707

    Location: Here and There...

    Two pages of arguing over the exact definition of socialism on a thread about the Conservative party while all the leadership candidates still Trott out a dozen brexit unicorns!
     
  6. efish

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 11, 2014

    Posts: 1,322

    The bogey man of socialism seeking to gain power in league with the evil Scots intent on robbing English gold and cattle.
    It will be the Conservative project fear line in the next election.

    Why Jeremy Corbyn is Nicaragua (insert the standard,'they always fail you know' claim') etc.
    With the S.N.P cast in the manner England at its most polemic and populist has described Scotland for centuries as 'rogues on the make.'

    Just don''t give the wider historical analysis that socialist revolutionaries in power generally have a very strong ideological commitment with a very weak grasp of how a political administration functions and how to run a complex administrative system ( shhhhh. don't say that, because Brexit).

    In contrast to ideology the revolutionary right has traditional focused on easily held and understood concepts, family, fear of outsiders etc. Its road to power is the easily held idea of things, the end of the road looks little different in terms of the inhumanity and suffering caused by these extremes of thought.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  7. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,249

    Location: Plymouth

    Historical materialism starts with a fundamentally flawed premise, specifically the idea that world history is independent of individual or collective consciousness. As such, even where the conclusions may seem valid, the deduction is flawed and the mechanism broken. This is supported by the failure of socialism, Marxism and communism in practice, where if the ideas weren't flawed, it would not have failed every time it is implemented.

    With this in mind, the key value of historical materialism is as a lesson in what happens when you try to shoehorn an ideology into a scientific structure and claim it to be factual, and have people build out based on the flawed ideas.
     
  8. Arazi

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 19, 2007

    Posts: 3,719

    Location: North

    Regardless of the Tories choosing their new party leader, does Theresa May have to step down once they choose whoever it is? Is there a legal process that removes her? Or could she just squat as PM until 2022?

    TLDR: Does Theresa May have to step down as PM once the Tories pick a leader?
     
  9. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 21,500

    I mean technically no, but she's hardly going to make her image worse than it is by being childish.
     
  10. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 9,304

    She has already stepped down as leader of the Tories, that is what triggered the race to succeed her. She is only staying as caretaker PM until that person is chosen.
     
  11. Arazi

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 19, 2007

    Posts: 3,719

    Location: North

    I understand all that, but does she have to step down or can she choose not to?
     
  12. Arazi

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 19, 2007

    Posts: 3,719

    Location: North

    So in you're opinion she does not have to step down? tbh, i cant seem to find the correct answer or facts on this, that is why i am asking.

    And to add another question, can she still call a general election?
     
  13. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 21,500

    She can call a vote on it yes, requires two thirds majority (434 seats) in parliament though for the government to allow that, which wont happen.

    A prime minister need only have control over the cabinet (not explicitly requiring party politics, but you'd be hard pressed to deal with it without them) and have majority support in the commons to be in the position, i really wish we'd move past this anachronism and just make abundantly clear who and what a PM is.

    After all you can technically vote in 650 independents with no party affiliation (practically impossible but whatever), so it has to work even in that realm.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  14. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,249

    Location: Plymouth

    Strictly speaking, it's the Queen that chooses the prime minister, and the convention is that a pm leaving office does not do so until a replacement who can command a majority of the commons has been identified and agreed. It isn't about the Tory leadership as such.
     
  15. Arazi

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 19, 2007

    Posts: 3,719

    Location: North

    Thanks, so, whoever the tories pick as leader there still has to be a vote to see if that person can command a majority in parliament?
     
  16. efish

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 11, 2014

    Posts: 1,322

    I will translate.

    You take a philosophical idea about society and social/ economic practice (non-empirical) that can be tested with the scientific method.
    That's a new idea, regardless how you view the philosophical/ ideological side of things.

    These days we call this a social science.

    Marx is considered one of the three founders of the social sciences and sociology in particular. You do not have to support or agree with Marx to note this.

    Its the method and the fact you can test it that's important.

    You were asked if you could find anything positive to say, you're answer is no you can't.

    'Flawed', 'broken', 'failed'

    Unrelenting negativity from which no escape is possible.
     
  17. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,249

    Location: Plymouth

    Historical materialism is best compared with intelligent design, a theory developed to justify an a priori assumption rather than to find any answers.

    That you cannot see that shows exactly the problem I highlighted several pages ago. If you don't start by working with reality, you'll never find any solutions.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  18. efish

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 11, 2014

    Posts: 1,322



    As a statement that works rhetorically but as an idea of things it's not serious.

    Also, I would point out I am not a Marxist.

    You were simply asked if you could say anything positive here. i.e how dogmatic is you're argument?

    You can't say anything positive and seem to view any alternative as a threat.

    That's just a silly statement.

    You contrast it to another idea you don't like. I am shocked, who would have guessed?
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  19. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,249

    Location: Plymouth

    It's not dogmatic to acknowledge a position as fatally flawed if it actually is. Remember, communism and socialism did not come from historical materialism, the philosophy was developed in an attempt to justify or pretend that socialism and communism were natural ways forward.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism

    I likened it to intelligent design because the thought process is the same. Intelligent design exists to provide a pseudoscientific justification for why God must exist, just as historical materialism exists to provide a pseudoscientific justification for a Marxist outcome. The problem is both started with the express purpose of validating a belief, rather than the belief being derived from the analysis.

    As I said, the value in it is as a lesson in failure.
     
  20. chrismscotland

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 16, 2009

    Posts: 2,407

    Anyone watching the C4 leadership debate?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.