The 2017 General Election Thread!

[RobA]

Dear sir,don't call the community cesspit for not having same political agenda as you do.

Next time you want to advocate that Communism has been tried please do read The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital beforehand as what's stated there heavily contradicts with any so called communist system tried so far.The only part of it i'll bother to state is Marx pointed out that Communism can only ever succeed in a capitalist and developed industrial society,not in rural Russia or Post Colonial nations of America/Africa/China.

I HAVE read the Communist Manifesto. I've also studied heavily the situation in Venezuela, the 'Cuban Communism' dream and economics from a supply-side and consumer-side. Supply-side economics works in every single format. Communism/Socialism relies heavily on the unfortunate (or lazy) and indoctrinates them into their idealogy.

Why should my taxes go through the roof just because some slob with no forward thinking got himself financially ruined and in a position of asking for free stuff? Sorry, but no. 

Communism does not 'benefit' the many. Communists would rather the gap between the rich and poor be zero and the poor be poorer rather than the gap be higher and the poor be richer. This false, sensationalist idea that communism, in any way, benefits "the people" is so ridiculously flawed it might as well be a kids story. 

You can see a full list of my political ideas on my Steam profile here, they are seen in the description.

 

[dzul]

more libcon fluff

I refuse to turn this thread into a typical internet debate,we both obviously have different stances on what Communism/Socialism stands for and it is pretty much pointless to prove our points against eachother.Last thing I'll state is saying things doesn't always make it real,just like People's Democratic Republic of North Korea is hardly democratic,neither are any of so called Communist states Socialist or Communist,theese are simply military juntas/oligarchies with nice propaganda to fool the simple man.

 

[RobA]

I refuse to turn this thread into a typical internet debate,we both obviously have different stances on what Communism/Socialism stands for and it is pretty much pointless to prove our points against eachother.Last thing i'll state is saying things doesn't always make it real,just like People's Democratic Republic of North Korea is hardly democratic,neither are any of so called communist states socialsit or communist,theese are simly military juntas/oligarchies with nice propaganda to fool the simple man.

As someone that has struggled with depression, financial loss and my countries economy being flushed down the toilet by a Labour Government - you are everything the Conservative/Libertarian movement laughs at. Continually, time after time, "IT'S NOT REAL SOCIALISM". When is it real Socialism? As far as I'm concerned, Venezuela followed the book directly. Here's a look at Venezuela today. People are now FIGHTING for capitalism because Socialism has failed them so hard. So much for "the people". 

How many more people need to die? How many more economies need to collapse? How many more people need to be thrown into poverty, because of Socialism? Oh wait, it's not real socialism.

Not real socialism, again?

Here's a video for you to watch.

What's Capitalism done for the world, you ask? Here you are.

Finally, here's a good picture, for the laughs.

I refuse to turn this thread into a typical internet debate,we both obviously have different stances on what Communism/Socialism stands for and it is pretty much pointless to prove our points against eachother.Last thing I'll state is saying things doesn't always make it real,just like People's Democratic Republic of North Korea is hardly democratic,neither are any of so called Communist states Socialist or Communist,theese are simply military juntas/oligarchies with nice propaganda to fool the simple man.

Also I ADORE how you dismiss my arguments as "more libcon stuff", you are truly a goldmine that just keeps giving that continually proves how censoring and ignorant Socialism actually is!

 

[dzul]

I edit your posts to make the thread less cluttered my friend,nothing to do with me disagreeing with your beliefs!

 

[Smith]

Remember guys, politics can be a touchy subject for some, so let's all remain civil as we are and this looks to be quite the interesting read!

Ultimately I will be voting Conservative, as I believe in equality of opportunity, not in equality of outcome. I would vote for a somewhat liberal-conservative party if one existed that had a chance of winning the election, however, there isn't one. I ultimately am economically Conservative and socially Liberal, so will be voting for Mrs. May. As a student who pays 9k a year, I still respect that the numbers must ultimately add up at the end of the day, and am not a fan of taxing the rich just because they have, through no fault of their own, been fortunate to have unique opportunities in life and/or have worked hard to get where they are. I believe that to be morally unjust.

 

[Starsky]

Ignorant kerfuffle




 

Legendary troll man nearly fell for it

 

[RobA]

Remember guys, politics can be a touchy subject for some, so let's all remain civil as we are and this looks to be quite the interesting read!

Ultimately I will be voting Conservative, as I believe in equality of opportunity, not in equality of outcome. I would vote for a somewhat liberal-conservative party if one existed that had a chance of winning the election, however, there isn't one. I ultimately am economically Conservative and socially Liberal, so will be voting for Mrs. May. As a student who pays 9k a year, I still respect that the numbers must ultimately add up at the end of the day, and am not a fan of taxing the rich just because they have, through no fault of their own, been fortunate to have unique opportunities in life and/or have worked hard to get where they are. I believe that to be morally unjust.

This exactly. We are all entitled to equality of opportunity - how you spend that opportunity is no fault of the Government.

 

[Anonymous Capybara1]

Remember guys, politics can be a touchy subject for some, so let's all remain civil as we are and this looks to be quite the interesting read!

Ultimately I will be voting Conservative, as I believe in equality of opportunity, not in equality of outcome. I would vote for a somewhat liberal-conservative party if one existed that had a chance of winning the election, however, there isn't one. I ultimately am economically Conservative and socially Liberal, so will be voting for Mrs. May. As a student who pays 9k a year, I still respect that the numbers must ultimately add up at the end of the day, and am not a fan of taxing the rich just because they have, through no fault of their own, been fortunate to have unique opportunities in life and/or have worked hard to get where they are. I believe that to be morally unjust.

You and I have both exactly the same political view, and view on the courtesy of this post! 

 

[RobA]

You and I have both exactly the same political view, and view on the courtesy of this post! 

I would describe myself the same, except I lean more socially Conservative, but not too far. I just think there needs to be a serious revival of British traditional values. 

Socialist economics really just don't make sense. It deeply infuriates me seeing people support a system in which so many people have suffered under, especially in Eastern Europe.

 

[Starsky]

This exactly. We are all entitled to equality of opportunity - how you spend that opportunity is no fault of the Government.

Yes, you are welcome to your opinion, do not take others and attempt to demean it as a fallacy. It is of poor taste and is against the very essence of politics to not discuss, but slander.

 

[Scott S]

1. Scrap student tuition fees 
   

I like labour however will vote conservative because Corbyn is a fucking idiot who sympathses with terrorists and would reck our country, furthermore how the fuck do u think we will find the money to pay off student debts, the country is in enough debt as it is 

 

[Namron]

I like labour however will vote conservative because Corbyn is a fucking idiot who sympathses with terrorists and would reck our country, furthermore how the fuck do u think we will find the money to pay off student debts, the country is in enough debt as it is 

This is one of the things that annoys me the most, when people don't read the things I've previously linked and give a balanced argument. All the budget plans etc are in there. One of the most common statements is "they won't be able to pay for it" yet all the people who say this are the people who aren't aware of the expenditure & income plans

 

[FergusW]

To be quite honest, I don't care who wins the Election. As long as Borris Johnson doesn't build Borris Island Airport and Heathrow gets a 3rd (but not bothered if it doesn't) then it's fine. 

 

[Starsky]

I like labour however will vote conservative because Corbyn is a fucking idiot who sympathses with terrorists and would reck our country, furthermore how the fuck do u think we will find the money to pay off student debts, the country is in enough debt as it is 

"Sympathises with terrorists".

Just because the news loves to stick on the reporting of his meets with IRA (which were successful peace talks by the way) and doesn't want every single interaction we have with absolute idiots to be met with violence. You do understand that the destablisation of the Middle East was caused by us in 2003? And resulted in the splinters of Al Qaeda and the Taliban to form ISIS? And Corbyn even said, this does not excuse the terrorists acts, I suppose you would want us to give the death penalty to the terrorists, yes? Because if so, what then separates us from the terrorists, as we would be as barbaric. In addition, do not forget that May SELLS weapons to the Saudis, who are the main reason for further destabilisation and the spread of radical Islam.

In terms of student debts, if George Osbourne and Phillip Hammond can pull £2,000,000,000 out of their arse, and not be bothered to cost their own manifesto, how do you believe the economy would be safe in their hands? The Labour Manifesto is fully costed, and you should want a better future for children! The removal of student debts and loans would greatly benefit this country in the educational sector.

 

[R Oxspring]

Only good party is the Monster Raving Loony Party and we should do the hockey cocky with the EU (in out in out)

 

[RobA]

"Sympathises with terrorists".

Just because the news loves to stick on the reporting of his meets with IRA (which were successful peace talks by the way) and doesn't want every single interaction we have with absolute idiots to be met with violence. You do understand that the destablisation of the Middle East was caused by us in 2003? And resulted in the splinters of Al Qaeda and the Taliban to form ISIS? And Corbyn even said, this does not excuse the terrorists acts, I suppose you would want us to give the death penalty to the terrorists, yes? Because if so, what then separates us from the terrorists, as we would be as barbaric. In addition, do not forget that May SELLS weapons to the Saudis, who are the main reason for further destabilisation and the spread of radical Islam.

Sorry, but no. I will NEVER negotiate with terrorists, that is what they are, terrorists. This country, nor its leaders, will ever negotiate with those that seek to harm the nation. 

It was not the UK that destabilised the region, it was the US. In fact, arguably, them pulling out of Iraq destroyed the countries future. Had we stayed in Iraq and occupied it until it stabilised and the local economy got itself back together, we wouldn't be in the situation where we are now, where hundreds of thousands of previous Hussein army recruits are joining terrorist organisations. 

The fact of the matter is that by leaving Iraq, we left a power vacuum ripe for terrorist groups. Had we stayed and enforced a democratic Government with the necessary resources and economy, the country would be in much better shape. 

I suppose you would want us to give the death penalty to the terrorists, yes? Because if so, what then separates us from the terrorists, as we would be as barbaric.

Tell that to the mothers of Manchester, with the flesh of their children in their hair. Tell that to the tourists of London, who were brutally run over without remorse. Tell that to the police officers, stabbed on the street without a second thought. Even better, tell that to our soldiers, who are beheaded like cattle in front of everyone, with their heads marched around like a war trophy. 

Berlin. Nice. Paris. London. Rome. Munich. New York. How many more people need to die before we realise that "keeping calm and carrying on" doesn't work? When will we finally destroy this disgusting plague, and get rid of these terrorists forever? 

In addition, do not forget that May SELLS weapons to the Saudis, who are the main reason for further destabilisation and the spread of radical Islam.

I agree this is shitty, but Corbyn would probably give them a hug and bow to ISIS and fund them himself. 

 

[Starsky]

It was not the UK that destabilised the region, it was the US. In fact, arguably, them pulling out of Iraq destroyed the countries future. Had we stayed in Iraq and occupied it until it stabilised and the local economy got itself back together, we wouldn't be in the situation where we are now, where hundreds of thousands of previous Hussein army recruits are joining terrorist organisations. 





 

Chilcot investigation. Blair was directly involved.

If we had left or stayed in that country, it would still be destabilised because of the damage already caused.

Tell that to the mothers of Manchester, with the flesh of their children in their hair. Tell that to the tourists of London, who were brutally run over without remorse. Tell that to the police officers, stabbed on the street without a second thought. Even better, tell that to our soldiers, who are beheaded like cattle in front of everyone, with their heads marched around like a war trophy. 

Berlin. Nice. Paris. London. Rome. Munich. New York. How many more people need to die before we realise that "keeping calm and carrying on" doesn't work? When will we finally destroy this disgusting plague, and get rid of these terrorists forever? 





 

A nice dramatisation, but let's follow your points.. should we tell these people how also:

• Weapons have been sold to the Saudis who are the main propagators of Radical Islam, by the Conservatives?
  
• The number of Police on the streets have been cut, leading to an increase in crime?
  
• A failure to uphold the peace within our prisons, which has allowed for terrorist sympathisers to target mentally ill and depressed convicts and brainwash them?
  
• A failure by the MI5 in monitoring a known terror suspect?
  

I thought someone like yourself who puts themselves across as informed would understand that terrorists wish to spread xenophobia against religions and races, that they would like us to regress into a state where the death penalty is accepted. In addition, thank you for naming several cities in Europe, care to also label cities within the Middle East that have been bombed by ISIS also, or are you going to bypass them because it doesn't fit your rhetoric?

I agree this is shitty, but Corbyn would probably give them a hug and bow to ISIS and fund them himself. 





 

The key to discussion and progress is to remain indifferent when discussing critical topics so that a judgement is able to be made without bias, as someone like yourself who aspires to be a politician/debater, you are failing to do so with comments like these.

In addition, want to know why this comment is poor? It's a double standard, you agree that it's shitty, but then go on to label that Corbyn will fund ISIS himself, but Theresa May and the Conservatives are already doing that by selling weapons to the Saudis, so do you actually disagree or is it just a swipe at Corbyn because you have different views to him?

 

[RobA]

Chilcot investigation. Blair was directly involved.

Fair enough, but I still put the bulk of responsibility on the shoulders of the US. 

• Weapons have been sold to the Saudis who are the main propagators of Radical Islam, by the Conservatives?
  

Nothing changing, every Government throughout our history has done it. It's terrible, I absolutely agree, but let's not pretend Labour doesn't have blood on its hands either. I disagree with it, of course, but it isn't enough to sway a vote.

• The number of Police on the streets have been cut, leading to an increase in crime?
  

Has the number of police been cut? Absolutely, but for good reasons. To reduce the national debt we need to spend less, not more. Besides, it has been evident time and time again the police have all the necessary resources needed - crime has not increased, in fact, violent crime is at its lowest in 30 Years.  

• A failure to uphold the peace within our prisons, which has allowed for terrorist sympathisers to target mentally ill and depressed convicts and brainwash them?
  

This is ABSOLUTELY an issue and I agree with you, but it's very hard to change. Prisons are hard to reform, and more often than not, hard to fund. Radicalisation is an issue and needs to be fixed, but prisons are hard to reform and radicalisation is hard to target. Government is not the solution to this problem.

• A failure by the MI5 in monitoring a known terror suspect?
  

Nothing to do with the Conservatives OR Labour; massive failure on MI5's part. 

I thought someone like yourself who puts themselves across as informed would understand that terrorists wish to spread xenophobia against religions and races, that they would like us to regress into a state where the death penalty is accepted. In addition, thank you for naming several cities in Europe, care to also label cities within the Middle East that have been bombed by ISIS also, or are you going to bypass them because it doesn't fit your rhetoric?

I disagree with this. I'm sorry, but "not becoming xenophobic" and "tolerance" just isn't working. No amount of tolerance will work against these people. They are literally coming for our children now, our children are at risk. We have tried tolerance. We tried 'getting on' with it. They continued. It's time we face that the Islamic State is a military and ideological issue that needs to be fought against.

When you completely get indoctrinated by IS nonsense, no amount of "love" or "tolerance" will stop you. These people see one thing - hatred. When they walk in our cities, they probably imagine spitting at us. 

In addition, thank you for naming several cities in Europe, care to also label cities within the Middle East that have been bombed by ISIS also, or are you going to bypass them because it doesn't fit your rhetoric?

Sure. Karbala, Baghdad, Tikrit, Kirkuk, Tuz Khormato, Hawija to name a few. I won't name all, as it's under IS territory, I'd be naming you all their territory, which is pointless. 

In addition, want to know why this comment is poor? It's a double standard, you agree that it's shitty, but then go on to label that Corbyn will fund ISIS himself, but Theresa May and the Conservatives are already doing that by selling weapons to the Saudis, so do you actually disagree or is it just a swipe at Corbyn because you have different views to him?

No, you are actually completely mistaken - I disagree with May on the issue, completely. I utterly think her selling weapons to Saudis is a mistake, but I believe Corbyn will wreck far worse havoc on our country than she will. I made no attempt at a 'swipe at Corbyn' simply saying I think he'd actually do worse than she would. That doesn't mean I support her for it. 

Just to add, you said about IS and the Middle East - that's another reason I DO want IS wiped out. The people in the Middle East deserve liberation.

The key to discussion and progress is to remain indifferent when discussing critical topics so that a judgement is able to be made without bias, as someone like yourself who aspires to be a politician/debater, you are failing to do so with comments like these.

Care to elaborate? Not sure I'm picking up on what you're connoting. 

 

[Starsky]

Fair enough, but I still put the bulk of responsibility on the shoulders of the US. 





 

It's on both, don't move the goalposts.

Nothing changing, every Government throughout our history has done it. It's terrible, I absolutely agree, but let's not pretend Labour doesn't have blood on its hands either. I disagree with it, of course, but it isn't enough to sway a vote.





 

Not trying to sway a vote, its just hypocritical to say that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser, and then bypass the fact that May and the Conservatives sell weapons to the Saudis. Not pretending that Labour doesn't have blood on its hands either (however I believe several people would be inclined to agree that it is the Blairites and the Right-winged Labour that has the blood on their hands).

Has the number of police been cut? Absolutely, but for good reasons. To reduce the national debt we need to spend less, not more. Besides, it has been evident time and time again the police have all the necessary resources needed - crime has not increased, in fact, violent crime is at its lowest in 30 Years.  





 

To reduce the national debt caused by austerity, borrowing, etc. Either way, it's pretty damning to say cutting the number of police was done for good reason. Yes, crime is at its lowest in thirty years; that does not mean that we should cut police numbers.

This is ABSOLUTELY an issue and I agree with you, but it's very hard to change. Prisons are hard to reform, and more often than not, hard to fund. Radicalisation is an issue and needs to be fixed, but prisons are hard to reform and radicalisation is hard to target. Government is not the solution to this problem.





1

Last time I remembered, most of our prisons are government owned, and there are only fourteen privately owned prisons in the UK. The government is part of the solution to this problem.

Nothing to do with the Conservatives OR Labour; massive failure on MI5's part. 





 

A massive failure of the Government and MI5, no matter who was in charge, this should have been handled pro-actively rather than reactively.

I disagree with this. I'm sorry, but "not becoming xenophobic" and "tolerance" just isn't working. No amount of tolerance will work against these people. They are literally coming for our children now, our children are at risk. We have tried tolerance. We tried 'getting on' with it. They continued. It's time we face that the Islamic State is a military and ideological issue that needs to be fought against.

When you completely get indoctrinated by IS nonsense, no amount of "love" or "tolerance" will stop you. These people see one thing - hatred. When they walk in our cities, they probably imagine spitting at us. 





 

Link

No, you are actually completely mistaken - I disagree with May on the issue, completely. I utterly think her selling weapons to Saudis is a mistake, but I believe Corbyn will wreck far worse havoc on our country than she will. I made no attempt at a 'swipe at Corbyn' simply saying I think he'd actually do worse than she would. That doesn't mean I support her for it. 





 

Straw Man fallacy.

Care to elaborate? Not sure I'm picking up on what you're connoting. 





 

You are failing to remain impartial.

This is my final post on the matter, as this will carry on for years.

 

[RobA]

It's on both, don't move the goalposts.

Didn't attempt to. I just said the BULK of the responsibility lies with the US, I never said the UK wasn't responsible also.

Not trying to sway a vote, its just hypocritical to say that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser, and then bypass the fact that May and the Conservatives sell weapons to the Saudis. Not pretending that Labour doesn't have blood on its hands either (however I believe several people would be inclined to agree that it is the Blairites and the Right-winged Labour that has the blood on their hands).

May sells weapons to countries that, may or may not, then indirectly give those weapons to terrorists. Corbyn wants to let the terrorists win and give them a nice hug. Pretty important difference for me. 

To reduce the national debt caused by austerity, borrowing, etc. Either way, it's pretty damning to say cutting the number of police was done for good reason. Yes, crime is at its lowest in thirty years; that does not mean that we should cut police numbers.

Spending money on something already decreasing is not an answer. The budget should follow a direct correlation with the crime rate. IMO, the objective of every single police force is to have so little crime that it puts itself out of business. 

Last time I remembered, most of our prisons are government owned, and there are only fourteen privately owned prisons in the UK. The government is part of the solution to this problem.

Again, radicalisation is hard to combat, and happens in every country, in every prison. Could we use better approaches and funding for councilling, therapists and make more soft methods available? Of course, rehabilitation should be the goal, but again, no UK-Government has achieved this yet. 

A massive failure of the Government and MI5, no matter who was in charge, this should have been handled pro-actively rather than reactively.

Sorry, no, it was an MI5 Fault. If I encounter a rude bus driver, I don't blame TfL, I blame the bus driver. 

Link

Good points, all of them, and I enjoy reddit myself, but people that allow themselves to be indoctrinated by the IS's crap and directly take money from them, are, IMO, already terrorists, and were already a threat to our nation. As said above, I have lived in extreme poverty, been depressed, been homeless and been absolutely hopeless at times - if you had come to me with Islamic State money, I would've punched you in the face. It isn't what situation you're in, it's what you're made of. Today, I do quite well for myself - recovered from all of the above without any help from ISIS. 

Straw Man fallacy.

Anyone can say anything, including myself, doesn't make us right. I believe you're just saying that, with no real grounding. Just my two cents. (or pennies)

You are failing to remain impartial.

I haven't attacked you personally, and throughout the whole thread, I've made it clear that I disagree with many things May has/will do - but that she is the only person that can secure a good Brexit deal and stabilise the economy without running it into the ground. I do not believe I am doing wrong there.