UK Local Elections 2012

As our British members are no doubt aware, the United Kingdom's local elections for 2012 will take place on May 3 of this year. Last year the Tories won the most local councils. The main parties competing in this election are the UK Independence Party, Conservative Party, Labour Party, and Liberal Democrats, however several smaller and regional parties are also competing. Below is some information on the candidates and parties people have to choose from. So which party will or would you vote for? Personally I am throwing my support behind the UK Independence Party, since they seem to be the only major party that is sane and I believe they are the only one of the big four that will stay true to their promise to get Britain out of the European Union, unlike LibLabCon.

Spoiler:

What's the UK?

NiteKrawler wrote:

What's the UK?

It's the ??? area:

I live in Africa so this doesn't pertain to me.

Fuck the UK. That is all.

UK party ideologies aside, if there was an EU-wide referendum on the sole question of "Should the UK leave the EU," I'd happily vote yes.

Trichos wrote:

UK party ideologies aside, if there was an EU-wide referendum on the sole question of "Should the UK leave the EU," I'd happily vote yes.

As would just about everyone in the UK. But they won't hold a referendum, both Labour and the Tories have promised a referendum on leaving the EU, but then blindly supported the EU once they formed governments. The unelected bureaucrats in the EU are too powerful, they wouldn't allow any country to leave, at least not peacefully.

保守的な wrote:

The unelected bureaucrats in the EU are too powerful, they wouldn't allow any country to leave, at least not peacefully.

If a country wanted to leave – if its primier executive wanted it, supported by its parliament – no one in the EU could effectively prevent it, especially if legitimized by a referendum. As powerful as you may fantasize the bad EU bureaucrats to be, it takes a country's head of government who lets him-/herself be persuaded in the first place.

It is one of the big ironies and hypocracies of nationalist EU skeptics to cite the EU's democracy deficites as a source of discontent with the EU, given that it's exactly national head of states' unwillingness to grant more power to the European parliament that makes for the parliament's weakness and the strength of unelected officials sent to the EU by the national executives.

However you may consider the situation, though, I acknowledge the fact that the Sun, the Daily Mail, and a number of incompetent politicians who have then blamed unpopular policies on the EU have done their job well to, in my opinion irreversibly, influence the UK public's opinion on the EU.
I don't have any problems with Brits, I merely see that the country's politicans can't go one step without calling for UK exceptions in the next-to-be-ratified treaty or block EU reform in any other way.

So I'd be glad to see the UK leave, for the sake of bith teh UK and the EU.

Trichos wrote:

保守的な wrote:

The unelected bureaucrats in the EU are too powerful, they wouldn't allow any country to leave, at least not peacefully.

If a country wanted to leave – if its primier executive wanted it, supported by its parliament – no one in the EU could effectively prevent it, especially if legitimized by a referendum. As powerful as you may fantasize the bad EU bureaucrats to be, it takes a country's head of government who lets him-/herself be persuaded in the first place.

It is one of the big ironies and hypocracies of nationalist EU skeptics to cite the EU's democracy deficites as a source of discontent with the EU, given that it's exactly national head of states' unwillingness to grant more power to the European parliament that makes for the parliament's weakness and the strength of unelected officials sent to the EU by the national executives.

However you may consider the situation, though, I acknowledge the fact that the Sun, the Daily Mail, and a number of incompetent politicians who have then blamed unpopular policies on the EU have done their job well to, in my opinion irreversibly, influence the UK public's opinion on the EU.
I don't have any problems with Brits, I merely see that the country's politicans can't go one step without calling for UK exceptions in the next-to-be-ratified treaty or block EU reform in any other way.

So I'd be glad to see the UK leave, for the sake of bith teh UK and the EU.

>Germany

Of course you would support the European Union, since it is effectively the Fourth Reich. Germany dominates the European Union both politically and economically. If the UK left the EU, then Germany have even more power over the EU and it's member states.

Also the problem with the EU being undemocratic isn't that "national governments" don't give MEPs power, since the democratic deficiency has nothing to do with the European Parliament (which is the only elected body in the entire EU), since the European Parliament has no power to begin with. The EU is undemocratic due to the way it was structured, it was designed from the start to crush democracy and replace it with their own ideology, technocracy. All of the real power rests with the European Commission and it's subsidiary institutions. The European Parliament (or the Council for that matter) cannot even propose or modify legislature, all of that is done by the unelected bureaucrats who put their own dreams of Federal Europe first and foremost, with total disregard for the peoples of Europe.

保守的な wrote:

Of course you would support the European Union, since it is effectively the Fourth Reich. Germany dominates the European Union both politically and economically.

It may be hard to believe, but I don't see the world through nationalist lenses, I don't care about my nationality, and I don't judge the EU on the basis of my citizenship.

保守的な wrote:

... it was designed from the start to crush democracy and replace it with their own ideology, technocracy.

Don't forget the UN's conspiracy to install a world government!

保守的な wrote:

All of the real power rests with the European Commission and its subsidiary institutions. The European Parliament (or the Council for that matter) cannot even propose or modify legislature, all of that is done by the unelected bureaucrats who put their own dreams of Federal Europe first and foremost, with total disregard for the peoples of Europe.

We agree on that, but who is responsible for the set-up of the Commission? The chancellors, the prime minister, the presidents, in other words: all the chief executives of the national states.
I've met few EU skeptics, however, who were thrilled about taking power away from the Commission, because they consider the Commission a way to nationally influence the EU when right-wing heads of state are in power. And even if they supported weakening the Commission, and here is where i call intellectual dishonesty and inconsistency, they didn't support strengthening the EU Parliament, because that would mean strengthening an institution above the national level, a notion they don't find particularly heartwarming.
The argument of democracy deficit is useful for EU skeptics, but honestly, even if that deficit was rectified, there is no way EU skeptics would embrace the EU, because most are not fond of any supernational entity.

If, however, you support weakening the commission and strengthening the Parliament in its relation to other EU institutions, then I don't care about whether you label yourself socialist, social democrat, libertarian, conservative, EU skeptic. Then we just agree.

Trichos wrote:

Don't forget the UN's conspiracy to install a world government!

It's not a conspiracy theory, the EU is openly technocratic, the elite bureaucrats admit that the reasons they usurped the democratically elected governments of Italy & Greece and replaced them with EU puppets was to institute new "technocratic governments" that answered to the EU bureaucrats and not the Italian or Greek people.

As per your reference to the United Nations attempting to form a world government... I know that Obama and others like him would very much like it if the entire world was under the control of the European Union or the United Nations, especially if they were the one(s) in charge of the new world government that would be erected in their image.

Trichos wrote:

We agree on that, but who is responsible for the set-up of the Commission? The chancellors, the prime minister, the presidents, in other words: all the chief executives of the national states.
I've met few EU skeptics, however, who were thrilled about taking power away from the Commission, because they consider the Commission a way to nationally influence the EU when right-wing heads of state are in power. And even if they supported weakening the Commission, and here is where i call intellectual dishonesty and inconsistency, they didn't support strengthening the EU Parliament, because that would mean strengthening an institution above the national level, a notion they don't find particularly heartwarming.
The argument of democracy deficit is useful for EU skeptics, but honestly, even if that deficit was rectified, there is no way EU skeptics would embrace the EU, because most are not fond of any supernational entity.

If, however, you support weakening the commission and strengthening the Parliament in its relation to other EU institutions, then I don't care about whether you label yourself socialist, social democrat, libertarian, conservative, EU skeptic. Then we just agree.

However neither the people or the governments of Europe have elected the European Commission, please show me where David Cameron elected José Barosso and the other 26 members of the Commission. Or for that matter the European Central Bank, European Court of Justice, and the other institutions.

While it is true that many eurosceptics would still want to leave the European Union even if it were a democracy, that doesn't negate the democratic deficit. If you had a choice between living under a supranational dictatorship and wanting to abolish it or living under a supranational democracy and wanting to abolish it, I would choose the democracy every time, but that doesn't change the fact that I would still want to abolish it.

If the EU were democratic, would you still support it and it's mission to destroy national democracy and countries as we know them? Also please tell me why should a German in Brussels be telling someone in Sofia (Bulgaria) how to live their life?

保守的な wrote:

If the EU were democratic, would you still support it and it's mission to destroy national democracy and countries as we know them?

You can of course put it like that if it suites your rhetoric interests, or you can just neutrally ask whether I support granting certain legislative competences to the EU.

First of all, I do not share your view that national democracies are in any way special. The national level is in no way more legitimized than others, a national parliament is just one next to municipal, regional, and supernational legislative organs. You may be proud to be an American, in my opinion national pride is irrational nonsense. I don't consider myself a German, at least not beyond the legal fact of being a "German citizen"), and I don't see my "national pride" being infringed by the EU – just as I don't see my regional identiy oppressed by the German national government, or my municipal identity oppresses by the regional government.
I'm in favour of organizing things – the police, food standards, labour standards, education, research – on the level which can most effectively organize it. As such, I am in favour of empowering the European Parliament with competences previously organized by parliaments of whatever level – whenever it makes sense. Just as I'm in favour of devoluting powers from the national level to regions or vice-versa when it makes sense.

Trichos wrote:

保守的な wrote:

If the EU were democratic, would you still support it and it's mission to destroy national democracy and countries as we know them?

You can of course put it like that if it suites your rhetoric interests, or you can just neutrally ask whether I support granting certain legislative competences to the EU.

First of all, I do not share your view that national democracies are in any way special. The national level is in no way more legitimized than others, a national parliament is just one next to municipal, regional, and supernational legislative organs. You may be proud to be an American, in my opinion national pride is irrational nonsense. I don't consider myself a German, at least not beyond the legal fact of being a "German citizen"), and I don't see my "national pride" being infringed by the EU – just as I don't see my regional identiy oppressed by the German national government, or my municipal identity oppresses by the regional government.
I'm in favour of organizing things – the police, food standards, labour standards, education, research – on the level which can most effectively organize it. As such, I am in favour of empowering the European Parliament with competences previously organized by parliaments of whatever level – whenever it makes sense. Just as I'm in favour of devoluting powers from the national level to regions (or vice-versa) when it makes sense.

Ah yes, there was a little bias in the way I worded that question, and I apologize. I understand where you are coming from with it adding just another "layer" to things, even though I disagree with that. Then there's the question of how many layers do you really want to add? Eventually it's going to become a bureaucratic nightmare and even at a federal level there is almost always a tendency to centralize power at the top. For instance the United States was founded as a country where the federal government is very weak and the power lies with states and the people. However as time went on power went up and the federal government has become more and more centralized. In fact it's gotten pretty sad, most people in my country can't even name their mayor, county commissioner, or even their governor.

I don't see the need to add another layer to the bureaucracy or create some "world government" that controls every aspect of my life. Aside from not being a democracy, the European Union has had a predominately negative impact on it's member states. Due to the far-left bureaucrats that run the European Union, we've seen democratically elected governments usurped and replaced with EU technocrats, we've seen massive immigration from Muslims who want nothing more than to force their own views of morality and legal systems on us, we've seen strict EU-level regulations that have done nothing but hinder several both the economy and employment, and that's just scratching the surface of the many ills the EU has brought upon the peoples of Europe. Sadly Obama is going down the same road as the far-left in Europe.