Green party call for 'Progressive alliance'

[cheshunt seagull]

As a Labour Party member I have favoured this approach for a while. I am a lot more pragmatic than many of my fellow members and am always looking at the most realistic options even if that means compromise; ideological purity is of little interest.. I would also like them to finally look seriously at proportional representation. Clearly we should also be looking to work with the SNP but it is hard to see how we can do that without some deal on another Scottish referendum following Brexit.

 

[highflyer]

Why? She's an excellent MP, political leanings aside.

Indeed, she spent this morning challenging minsters on the state of train services. Still doing her job for us in the midst of chaos.

 

[virtual22]

Good God please no! Having lived through a green administration in Brighton the thought of them having any sort of power at all at a national level is more scary than Brexit!

 

[Seagull58]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to call it a "Regressive Alliance", since the Greens wish to take the world back to how it was before the Industrial Revolution. They possibly have more in common with the Amish community than the other political parties.

 

[Seagull27]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to call it a "Regressive Alliance", since the Greens wish to take the world back to how it was before the Industrial Revolution. They possibly have more in common with the Amish community than the other political parties.

Is that right? Which policies of theirs would you describe as pre-industrial? And which policies do you feel are in common with Amish values?

 

[worthingseagull123]

Why? She's an excellent MP, political leanings aside.

Is she?

How much time does she spend in her constituency?

 

[looney]

Good God please no! Having lived through a green administration in Brighton the thought of them having any sort of power at all at a national level is more scary than Brexit!

Being dyslexic I misread that as "is more scary than Bexhill!" Maybe a topic worth its own thread.?

 

[Stat Brother]

Is that right? Which policies of theirs would you describe as pre-industrial? And which policies do you feel are in common with Amish values?

Come on, where have you been for the last week.
You no longer need actual facts to back up political opinions.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[looney]

Is that right? Which policies of theirs would you describe as pre-industrial? And which policies do you feel are in common with Amish values?

Most of them, they are anti technology and anti-science to scary levels. They oppose stem cell research and GM crops for starters, they do not promote efficient forms of alternate energy like geothermal or hydro-electric imposing a cost on the poor.

They are in favour of organic farming and oppose fracking, again evidence free posturing. I dont know there health policies but these types tend to march in step with anti-vaxers and homeopaths.

Scary bunch of nutbars, avoid.

 

[Buzzer]

Why? She's an excellent MP, political leanings aside.

Seconded.

 

[BBassic]

Said the other day I could get behind this.

It would need to ensure it grabs the young vote. Might have been a low turnout but those 18 - 24 year old's who did bother will be feeling might disenfranchised at the moment.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Be careful what you wish for. May combines being extremely right wing economically and socially illiberal with being politically competent. She is also going to be able to duck out of taking responsibility for the inevitable shitfest that brexit will bring: 'I didn't want it but now we've got it i am the best person to manage it'. As a taster for what is likely to be ahead, there is already a lot of appetite amongst Leave backers for making the UK a full-on tax haven, dopping corporation tax to 10% or less and I suspect May will be happy to oblige.

The problem with the PLP is that they still think Corbyn is the problem and that if they can just get back to where they were before, all will be well. In reality Crobyn's rise just revealed how split the party had become. Until someone acknowledges that, and suggests a path that is different from ANY version of the past, they will be stuck bouncing back and forth between Old Labour and Tory lite, both of which have already been rejected by the wider public.

I hear what you are saying - just a further indication of how horrible it is.

And I have just had a notification from my iPad screen that johnson is NOT standing for the leadership. Quelle Surprise.

 

[Was not Was]

Most of them, they are anti technology and anti-science to scary levels. They oppose stem cell research and GM crops for starters, they do not promote efficient forms of alternate energy like geothermal or hydro-electric imposing a cost on the poor.

They are in favour of organic farming and oppose fracking, again evidence free posturing. I dont know there health policies but these types tend to march in step with anti-vaxers and homeopaths.

Scary bunch of nutbars, avoid.

Wrong. Green Party supports stem cell research and has done for years.

And though I agree with you on GM, the anti-science mud doesn't stick any more. It's the big parties and their obsession with economic growth, that's anti-science: imagining we can have infinite growth on a finite planet is absurd, yet it's the unstated assumption behind the economic policy of all the main parties.

 

[Buzzer]

Any progressive alliance of the left will be doomed to failure. The battle ground for winning British elections is fought in the centre ground.

 

[Seagull27]

They oppose stem cell research

No they don't. https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/13-04-2011-greens-science.html

They do not promote efficient forms of alternate energy like geothermal or hydro-electric

I'm pretty sure that's not true. Any evidence? They talk about both in their latest energy policy: https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/ey.html

They are in favour of organic farming and oppose fracking, again evidence free posturing.

There is plenty of evidence that fracking isn't exactly the most environmentally friendly of processes...

And in any case, this is why having them in alliance with other parties is a benefit. They are the only party that pays even moderately enough attention to climate change - which is quite clearly a very pro-science policy. They may have some wackier ideas, but in alliance with other parties these will be disregarded, while the more important and sensible policies are worked on together.

 

[looney]

Wrong. Green Party supports stem cell research and has done for years.

And though I agree with you on GM, the anti-science mud doesn't stick any more. It's the big parties and their obsession with economic growth, that's anti-science: imagining we can have infinite growth on a finite planet is absurd, yet it's the unstated assumption behind the economic policy of all the main parties.

Well it didn't take long for you to go full moonbat. Economic growth isn't about "goballing raw resources" thats why we have a service sector for starters. Economic growth also lifts people out of poverty, again I pointed out the poor angle in my post.

Oh and I'm pretty sure the stem cell bit still holds. They are are a neo-Amish party, all they need is the Dungarees and the funny beards,eh Brother Caleb?

 

[Machiavelli]

Any progressive alliance of the left will be doomed to failure. The battle ground for winning British elections is fought in the centre ground.

It seems like the best option at the moment, especially given the state of all the left-leaning political parties, with the added scenario of a possible (likely?) independence for Scotland.
And the centre ground shifts. It's shifted substantially in the past few decades, and might even be shifting/have shifted in a different (although right-wing) direction more recently. Any leftward shift in that centre ground looks highly improbable at the moment, and will take a long time, probably decades, to occur, and will require serious reorganisation of the left, either through such a progressive alliance or through proportional representation. However attractive the latter proposition might be (and that in itself is debatable), it is as likely to favour right-wing parties as those from the left.

 

[Buzzer]

It seems like the best option at the moment, especially given the state of all the left-leaning political parties, with the added scenario of a possible (likely?) independence for Scotland.
And the centre ground shifts. It's shifted substantially in the past few decades, and might even be shifting/have shifted in a different (although right-wing) direction more recently. Any leftward shift in that centre ground looks highly improbable at the moment, and will take a long time, probably decades, to occur, and will require serious reorganisation of the left, either through such a progressive alliance or through proportional representation. However attractive the latter proposition might be (and that in itself is debatable), it is as likely to favour right-wing parties as those from the left.

Scotland will not vote for independence IMO. Brent Oil is much lower than at the time of the previous referendum and the Spanish and French have already told the Scottish that they will not be able to join the EU as an independent nation. And just how left-leaning are the SNP? They talk a good fight but they still act like a protest party in opposition. They have had the legal right to vary income tax for Scots by up to +/- 3p since 1999 yet they have never done this - why not? Surely any 'left-wing' party would be a great believer in higher taxes and increased public spending. They are frauds.

PR also won't happen. We had a referendum about it and it was rejected quite emphatically.

 

[mickybha]

I can see it now the seven bridge converted to a cycle lane and the party conference held in red yurts in Lewes

 

[looney]

No they don't. https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/13-04-2011-greens-science.html



I'm pretty sure that's not true. Any evidence? They talk about both in their latest energy policy: https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/ey.html



There is plenty of evidence that fracking isn't exactly the most environmentally friendly of processes...

And in any case, this is why having them in alliance with other parties is a benefit. They are the only party that pays even moderately enough attention to climate change - which is quite clearly a very pro-science policy. They may have some wackier ideas, but in alliance with other parties these will be disregarded, while the more important and sensible policies are worked on together.

OK good to say they now beleive homeopathy should be tested. Sad that they dont acknowledge its already been tested 1000s of times and is absolute quackery.

Then theres this.."Haldane principle".

The idea that researchers choose what gets funded, this will syphon of more money into abstract research rather than applied It ignores aspects like the social good and self selection biases. Its an amishesque retreat into the past. I haven't even seen greens pay lip service to mass production of energy.

Fracking posses no scientific greater risk than traditional mining.

Again Anthropological Global Warming however valid, the effort needed to mitigate impacts is futile, its just a vessel for scare mongering.