If You Were Incharge What Would Your Main Policy Be?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 12 Sep 2006, 17:26

Pippa wrote:Joe

Do you think that the BNP is worse than the Labour/Conservative/Liberal or any other party for that matter? In what ways are they worse? Is it because of how you perceive they would be, what they say, how they measure up with how others have faired etc etc?

Yes I do think they are worse than the main 3 parties. They are insidiously trying to shroud their hateful agenda with a veneer of political legitimacy and attempting to gain popularity by appealing to the masses' sense of discontent with populist, reactionary policies like capital punishment for paedophiles.

The last time a European nation had a far-right nationalist party in power during a time of extreme economic hardship (like the hardship many of us anticipate arising as a result of Peak Oil) it resulted in a world war and the systematic extermination of 6 million people.

ianryder · Post by **ianryder** » 12 Sep 2006, 20:17

I think it's fair to say that the only reason the BNP are interested in PO is that they know it might bring about the type of social disintegration that would allow them to gain power. It's exactly how Hitler got into power after the collapse of the economic system in the 1930s. Common sense if you know the only way to get into power will be to find scapegoats for the mess we might well find ourselves in.

The BNP are intrinsically evil in my view and should we have some form of economic collapse they would undoubtedly gain more power in this country. An extremely scary thought with 60 million desperate people.

MisterE · Post by **MisterE** » 12 Sep 2006, 23:38

BNP are nazis end of. I'm for most of the above. But in reality we are all wasting our shitty miniscule lives (and I say that as a v happy man with two great kids and a wife). The human race is what it is, and we should be (as crazy as this sounds) developing the ability to inhabit other worlds other than earth. Trouble is we only live for 80 yrs if your lucky and for 60 of those your in some form of work be it school or employment. For 30 of those you work like no tomorrow to raise a family. Then the cycle repeats but with a bit more tax and less rights. If we lived until 300yrs (any amount would do) would we function in the same insane pattern? No, we would have the time to invest our energy into other meaningful quests. Humans are pioneers by nature but we have stop discovering ? the cosmos is massive and living on other worlds would solve every problem, yet we invest nothing into it. I know this all sounds crazy ? which in many respects it is, but such things are possible. Sadly though we are just not capable of seeing the answers. We are a lot like a fish that jumps out of the water, we choke and flap and do our best to get back in ? what we don?t do is choke and shout omg fire! Ie mans greatest invention.

The facts are simple if left to our own devices we will keep populating the planet, we will use every resource and if it moves we?ll eat it, when your home is getting full you simply need to find another home and that should be our number 1 priority. At the end of the day, the earth will kick back, many will die or not be given the chance of live due to our control (totalitarian regime) or the earths actions (mother nature). It may not happen in our life time but it will happen hard times or worst are to come ? hence I think my idea is probably no more crazy than the rest. It just is not possible to have this many people and live in a sustainable manner. We all have a and always will have the desire to have a good life and to produce life you just can not suppress that, its who we are.

DaBeeeenster · Post by **DaBeeeenster** » 12 Sep 2006, 23:49

My solution would probably be to destroy all televisions. Really.

DaBeeeenster · Post by **DaBeeeenster** » 12 Sep 2006, 23:51

Cabrone wrote:
The most effective thing would be a long-running (i.e. permanent) and unavoidable educational campaign in all forms of the media, from TV to newspapers to door-to-door, looking at energy awareness, economic awareness and roots to true sustainability, and the moral imperative for each person to achieve that.
I'd agree that educating the populace about the situation that we are in is the very first thing that we need to do. Without the will of the people nothing will change until mother nature forces us to.

I'll vote for any party that has the balls to stand up to the people of the UK and tell them straight about the dire situation we are in but they all seem so damn spineless.

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2368

Pippa · Post by **Pippa** » 13 Sep 2006, 08:47

Ever since I've been around to observe (43 years) I have watched the systematic destruction of common sense and contentment brought about by various labour and conservative governments at the apparant bequest of the people.

What a load of xxxxxxx.

We have stood aside and scratched our chins as decency, self disipline and community has been replaced by endless rule and law justified by one flimsy excuse or another whilst who ever is in power at the time hands out empty promises and guarantees of more care, benefits and standards, and we collectively fall for it either by agreeing or doing nothing.

In the meantime, we have an under current of fear propagated and allowed to fester by whom ever it is going to benefit; definately NOT the huge proportion of bored, overweight young kids stuck a home eating xxxx and plugged in 6 hours a day or more into the best propaganda machine ever invented, or their disallusioned parents (and yes that does include the BBC - goodness what is happening to me!)

So who ever is in power now really is - enter fascists stage left - woops now I see they are already here

There are so many things that horrify me about the way we go about day to day life including the mass transportation of females from Europe and other "far away" places for use as prostitutes in our wonderful country. Who would willingly go and use this sort of facility and how long before our young woman are transported against their will to some seedy destination for the profit and "pleasure" of others.

Its hard not to feel defeated in the face of SO MANY inequalities and injusticies and so much APATHY. We need a party that looks hard, acts hard and thinks fair.

Sadly, I look but see nothing.

MisterE · Post by **MisterE** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:04

Spot on pippa, all I can say is that I am glad I was born in 1970 and had a taste of decency and community. There is so much propaganda thrown at people today its unreal. I'd stick with my crazy plan of action though - but in order for any plan to work you would have to boost the community spirit a 1000 fold and perhaps that is where we should start

not easy though considering every government wants to crush it and make us all individuals (ie stabbing each other in the back instead of them) clearly people are easier to control and lie to when they are of an individualistic nature.

Pippa · Post by **Pippa** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:09

"..boost the community spirit a 1000 fold......"

".....clearly people are easier to control and lie to when they are of an individualistic nature."

When we identify the answer we find the solution.........

We need to GET TOGETHER and STAY IN TOUCH.

This is why I am going to Cambridge tomorrow to see RalphW and Sue

horapollo123 · Post by **horapollo123** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:25

I'm of the opinion that human beings being what they are, the problems that beset or are about to beset the world are pretty much intractable. The fact is the vast majority of people won't do anything about mitigating the effects of their own lifestyles until forced to do so, be that by government or by circumstance. So either government has to tackle the issues by legislation-and which government (a Western one especially) would seriously contemplate limiting car use, start preaching a lower standard of living, start enforcing lower birth rates? It'd be political suicide-or changes will eventually be forced onto us all by geological or meteorological neccessity.

MisterE, moving to other planets is quite an amusing idea, but wholly impracticable. The energy (and expence!) required just to get half a dozen people into space at the moment is phenomenal, and the fact is that there are no other habitable planets that we know of.

Pippa, I like your idea of a new political party. I have occassionally wondered at setting up a party that wouldn't be afraid to tackle some of the issues, but how would such a party fare? The Green Party should be espousing a number of relevant policies, but where are they at Westminster?

Cabrone · Post by **Cabrone** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:40

Joe

Yes, I have read about the BNP being PO aware but I doubt that they have any solutions to peak oil. Surely it would be in their interests to let it happen. The BNP is negative and destructive, what we need is a party that is positive and constructive.

DaBeeeenster

I would vote for the greens but at the last council elections they didn't stand in my borough. Guess they must have thought that they were not going to get much out of the people that live in my area (though I'm not so sure). If they stand again I'd vote for them else I probably won't bother.

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:41

Pippa wrote:
Its hard not to feel defeated in the face of SO MANY inequalities and injusticies and so much APATHY. We need a party that looks hard, acts hard and thinks fair.

Do we? I disagree. A party, any party, forms part of the current socioeconomic system and being just one cog among other would not have much ability to change much even if it wanted to, even if it looked hard, acted hard and thinks fair! It would just end up as another attempt to fix the fa?ade of a rotten house. Getting to the core of the problem represents the bet in solving any problem.

Pippa · Post by **Pippa** » 13 Sep 2006, 09:54

Cabrone

Speak and vote in that order I think! We are all doing our best to get the depletion message out. We've got to keep it up! Stick together! (fingers down throat moment).

I understand when you say you propably won't vote if their isn't a Green Party but what will you do instead?

Isenhand

I agree the party is power is only a small cog, "they" even made the subject into a comedy programme called Yes Minister and Yes PrimeMinister. Surely though, if we want to live out the optimistic scenarios of resource depletion and climate change we must be interested in as many of the small cogs as we can?

Doesn't that mean busting a gut to get people to see the facts on a personal level, going all out to work out how to reduce, re-use and recycle (like Aliwood), take responsibility personally and resist the tempation to just walk away?

P.S

I am crap at all of the above, the metaphorical mountain often seems just too huge to even start climbing, why bother, lets just sit in the sunshine and wait for chaos to arrive.

frankd2689 · Post by **frankd2689** » 13 Sep 2006, 10:20

Hi Guys,
I try not to get caught up in the forum debates but here's my 2p.
It doesn't matter what parties there are if a massive percentage of the population can't be bothered to vote and the majority of the ones who do don't read the various party monifestos or watch the party political broadcasts.
Compare that with the day long queues of voters in some of the '3rd world' countries.
Do we get the government we deserve ?
Yes. As long as it's :-
Easier not to vote than to vote
Easier not to read than to read
Easier not to think than to think
Easier to watch crap on TV than search for something with a bit of substance.

It doesn't help when its :-
Easier to eat junk food than to eat sensibly
Easier to be obese than to be fit.

We need (but will not get) another Age of Enlightenment when education
and knowledge and self improvement are seen as desirable and goals for all, in their own right.

Perhaps PO will help to drive this, if cheap global media entertainment gives way to a sense of local responsibility as global influences contract.

That's my rant

Cheers

GD · Post by GD » 13 Sep 2006, 10:30

Guys, please take a look at the links on my signature. The eco-reforms proposed on my earlier post on this thread aims to do exactly what you're saying. The trick is to align common interest with self interest. In there we have a more natural economic order - common sense, based in reality.

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 13 Sep 2006, 10:47

Pippa wrote:Surely though, if we want to live out the optimistic scenarios of resource depletion and climate change we must be interested in as many of the small cogs as we can?

I would say no. With finite resources and finite time I would concentrate my efforts on what would most likely achieve a given objective. With the rare exception most politicians promise a sunny day and work for that. I don?t think they will want to tackle any serious problems, especially ones that have a doom and gloom feel to them, until it becomes too late. I think networking between ourselves represents our best hope and we should concentrate our time and resources on that. Build a new society!

On saying that I would not give up hope on politicians and I also recognise that I might have it wrong. Perhaps in the end politicians will do something in time and head off disaster. So perhaps some small resources could go towards that. Simpol could represent a good possibility.

Pippa wrote: Doesn't that mean busting a gut to get people to see the facts on a personal level, going all out to work out how to reduce, re-use and recycle (like Aliwood), take responsibility personally and resist the tempation to just walk away?

That?s part of it