Is UK An Elite Dictaorship?

GrannyRose I don't accept that there is ever such a thing as a collective "will of the people".

I have indeed heard of Matt Goodwin, there was a lot about him on twitter and in serious media when his last book, with its slightly unhinged thesis about 'the elite', was published.

The question remains unanswered, though. Just who, or what, is 'the elite'?

In Archaeological terms and 'elite' seems just to be people with wealth and large houses... I would say that did, quite accurately, describe our ruling elite until probably the early - mid 20th C but they were different from 'opinion formers' (such as those Heath and Goodwin are railing against). I'm wondering if 'opinion formers' can be counted as an 'elite' at all..

I agree with you. I think the "elite" is some kind of strawman bogey, similar to lizards or the WEF. Imagining there's a controlling elite is straight out of populists' handbook. All we need is some kind of hero to save us from the "elite" and all will be well!

growstuff

GrannyRose I don't accept that there is ever such a thing as a collective "will of the people".

It's a very useful concept for authoritarians of all shades of political belief, though....

I believe that nice Mr Hitler made good use of it...

A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?

Do those who voted against immediately lose their 'peoplehood' and become alien beings?

People who don't accept the "will of the people" are smeared as traitors, rather than people who have different views.

It's also essential in any democracy that there is protection for minorities. Otherwise, minorities suffer the same fate as the sheep and two wolves discussing what to have for dinner.

MaizieD

growstuff

GrannyRose I don't accept that there is ever such a thing as a collective "will of the people".

It's a very useful concept for authoritarians of all shades of political belief, though....

I believe that nice Mr Hitler made good use of it...

A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?

Do those who voted against immediately lose their 'peoplehood' and become alien beings?

"A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?"

But that really is the very thing that some on here do believe, isn't it? It's really very worrying that people can think that having voted, under dubious circumstances and winning by very little, they should be able to influence how we think and what we say about our government and the outcome of that vote. It really is rather like Chinese thinking. Very worrying.

I still can't really understand why they think that's okay and democratic.

Maize D

So what is your answer. Are you saying that there is no point in voting at all. I’ll admit there seems very little point in it at the moment but I thought that democracy was supposed to be a good thing and how can you have democracy with some sort of voting.

And bringing Hitler into to was a very low blow and suggests to me you think you are losing the argument.

Without some form of voting.

Will someone please tell me why we vote?

All legitimate citizens of the U.K. have a vote.

Sometimes the vote goes how we want, sometimes it doesn’t.

ronib

Doodledog the simple choice of stay or go was on the referendum ballot paper. Yes it was a hoax of epic proportions if you like but in the context of this post, arguably the elite ruling group whoever they are/were under David Cameron were strongly against exiting the EU. So in this rare instance government by referendum seems to have gone against the assumed wishes of the governing elites.

If Cameron was against Leaving the EU why did he promise to do whatever the referendum decided? He must have been a poor political decision maker.

DaisyAnneReturns

MaizieD

growstuff

GrannyRose I don't accept that there is ever such a thing as a collective "will of the people".

It's a very useful concept for authoritarians of all shades of political belief, though....

I believe that nice Mr Hitler made good use of it...

A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?

Do those who voted against immediately lose their 'peoplehood' and become alien beings?

"A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?"

But that really is the very thing that some on here do believe, isn't it? It's really very worrying that people can think that having voted, under dubious circumstances and winning by very little, they should be able to influence how we think and what we say about our government and the outcome of that vote. It really is rather like Chinese thinking. Very worrying.

I still can't really understand why they think that's okay and democratic.

The slight majority of people who voted to leave the EU were told by the govt of the day that if only one more vote was for Brexit it would count, in fact it was over a million.
So it wasn’t what they, the ones who voted to leave said or thought or influenced it was the govt.Blame the govt not the people.
I voted to stay in the EU but won’t go down the road of bleating on about it, claiming it was undemocratic ( would it have been undemocratic if remain had won the day?)

GrannyGravy13

All legitimate citizens of the U.K. have a vote.

Sometimes the vote goes how we want, sometimes it doesn’t.

This

GrannyRose15

Will someone please tell me why we vote?

We vote and accept that the majority vote will win, but no-one with any iota of intelligence surely believes that the 'will' of the majority represents the 'will' of the entire population?

I don't consider myself to be losing the argument by citing Hitler. If you are going to believe in a trope used by one of the most vile dictators of the 20th Century to justify the appalling exercise of his will I think you need to recognise that fact and have serious rethink.

As others have pointed out, our British concept of democracy includes consideration of minorities and opposition to the majority's view is not considered traitorous.

Oreo

DaisyAnneReturns

MaizieD

growstuff

GrannyRose I don't accept that there is ever such a thing as a collective "will of the people".

It's a very useful concept for authoritarians of all shades of political belief, though....

I believe that nice Mr Hitler made good use of it...

A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?

Do those who voted against immediately lose their 'peoplehood' and become alien beings?

"A vote in favour of something is only ever a will of the people who voted in favour. That's not too difficult to understand, is it?"

But that really is the very thing that some on here do believe, isn't it? It's really very worrying that people can think that having voted, under dubious circumstances and winning by very little, they should be able to influence how we think and what we say about our government and the outcome of that vote. It really is rather like Chinese thinking. Very worrying.

I still can't really understand why they think that's okay and democratic.

The slight majority of people who voted to leave the EU were told by the govt of the day that if only one more vote was for Brexit it would count, in fact it was over a million.
So it wasn’t what they, the ones who voted to leave said or thought or influenced it was the govt.Blame the govt not the people.
I voted to stay in the EU but won’t go down the road of bleating on about it, claiming it was undemocratic ( would it have been undemocratic if remain had won the day?)

Though it definitely comes into it, we're not specifically discussing vote to leave the EU. We could equally well be looking at the last general election, or, indeed any general election.

However, as the thread is about 'dictatorship' and democracy is definitely involved somewhere along the line I think we have every right to post examples of undemocratic behaviour and behaviour that leads to dictatorships.

Some EU referendum campaigns contravened our notions of democracy, which go a bit further than solely imposing the will of the majority, The manner in which the result was implemented tottered on the edge of being democratic. There was certainly no effort whatsoever to gain 'losers consent', which, contrary to popular belief, is not something that the 'losers' are obliged to give.

Like 'the will of the people', losers consent is used as a sort of fig leaf to make the 'winners' feel more comfortable about the gross things they have forced on the 'losers'. IMO...

GrannyGravy13

All legitimate citizens of the U.K. have a vote.

Sometimes the vote goes how we want, sometimes it doesn’t.

But do you accept that or try to change the vote? Cry foul and demand another vote. Do you try to persuade people that the vote was win simply because those who voted for didn’t know what they were doing and of course all those that voted against were fully conversant with all the facts? My view is there has got to be a point where the outcome of a vote is accepted. That is true whether it goes my way or not.

I had thought that that view was axiomatic in a democratic society but obviously not.

But as I said up thread I don’t actually believe that we live in a democratic society any longer. I would love it if we did but have no idea how to regain democracy now it has been lost.

GrannyRose15

GrannyGravy13

All legitimate citizens of the U.K. have a vote.

Sometimes the vote goes how we want, sometimes it doesn’t.

But do you accept that or try to change the vote? Cry foul and demand another vote. Do you try to persuade people that the vote was win simply because those who voted for didn’t know what they were doing and of course all those that voted against were fully conversant with all the facts? My view is there has got to be a point where the outcome of a vote is accepted. That is true whether it goes my way or not.

I had thought that that view was axiomatic in a democratic society but obviously not.

You're ignoring my post about 'the will of the people', and you are confusing 'acceptance' with 'consent'.

And since you can't move from the EU vote to the more usual 'democratic' questioning as to what people would prefer, a general election, I can tell you now that I, and many others can 'accept' that the vote happened and we have left the EU but we will never, ever consent to it.

Perhaps you should be a bit more precise with your language if you want a reasonable discussion.

GrannyRose15

Maize D

So what is your answer. Are you saying that there is no point in voting at all. I’ll admit there seems very little point in it at the moment but I thought that democracy was supposed to be a good thing and how can you have democracy with some sort of voting.

And bringing Hitler into to was a very low blow and suggests to me you think you are losing the argument.

I don't agree that bringing Hitler into the argument was a low blow. The way the Nazi Party seized power in 1930s Germany remains a classic example of how an authoritarian regime can come to power without a military take-over, but by deceiving the public to act against its own interests. The "will of the people" was used to justify all kinds of horror and people who objected were seen as traitors to their country.

GrannyRose15

But as I said up thread I don’t actually believe that we live in a democratic society any longer. I would love it if we did but have no idea how to regain democracy now it has been lost.

In what ways do we no longer in a democratic society which existed a couple of decades ago?

FWIW I think the idea of democracy is flawed anyway. It's a reasonably simple ideal, but is interpreted differently over time and in different countries. It makes for a good battle cry, but what do those who claim democracy has been lost want?

My view is there has got to be a point where the outcome of a vote is accepted. That is true whether it goes my way or not. GrannyRose15

When has a vote not been accepted in this country? There is nothing undemocratic about not liking the outcome or thinking it was a "hand of God" win, or working towards a further democratic change.

So just when did we not leave the EU? Are you, perhaps, suggesting this is all a dream and we will all wake up and find it hasn't happened?

GrannyRose15

But as I said up thread I don’t actually believe that we live in a democratic society any longer. I would love it if we did but have no idea how to regain democracy now it has been lost.

We obviously don't live as they do in China, Russia, etc., were we can only say what the goverment allows. But why do you believe that a) that is in any way democracy or b) there has ever been a vote in this country, where people had to like the outcome and were not allowed to try an make changes to that outcome, democratically?

ThIs is very strange thinking in a democratic country.

MaizieD

GrannyRose15

Will someone please tell me why we vote?

We vote and accept that the majority vote will win, but no-one with any iota of intelligence surely believes that the 'will' of the majority represents the 'will' of the entire population?

I don't consider myself to be losing the argument by citing Hitler. If you are going to believe in a trope used by one of the most vile dictators of the 20th Century to justify the appalling exercise of his will I think you need to recognise that fact and have serious rethink.

As others have pointed out, our British concept of democracy includes consideration of minorities and opposition to the majority's view is not considered traitorous.

I can only agree with this.

Many have a sanitised, black and white film idea of what Hitler did and how he got to power. So few are left who actually saw war. Unless you lived in the Channel Islands, no British territory was occupied. Most have no idea why other countries fear Populist leaders. Our cities were never flattened as those were on the continent, particularly in Germany itself. The sound of Jackboots never echoed in our streets.

There is no virtue in foolhardiness, and Johnson was foolhardy in the way he took us out of the EU. It would have been perfectly possible to take us out in a way that caused far less damage. There is no virtue in claiming that you can do what you cannot do. Johnson claimed he had an "oven ready" deal; there was never any such thing.

There is no bravery in lying to your country.

DAR Johnson took us out of the EU but it is now up-to successive governments and prime ministers to work out next steps. Johnson has gone and hopefully stays away.
From one point of view, the UK has had a fast turnover of prime ministers in recent years and at least there’s no sitting despot at the helm. So a strength and not a weakness of the parliamentary system? It could be much worse?