Alternative Vote Referendum (UK)

[Viet Minh]

What are people's opinions on this? I personally think an AV system would be a very positive change, at the moment we are stuck with a two-party system, voting for anyone else is basially a waste of time. This system would give a better chance to Socialist parties, the Green Party etc. On the downside, the far right vote (BNP, NF) would be then added to the more mainstream right wing (Tories, UKIP) and in turn those parties might pander to their ideologies more than they do already. What do?

[Red Future]

Its pretty overrated , especially by its main trumpeters the Liberals. to be honest it would probrably be some improvement to the variants of social democracy aka -Greens -just as much it could benefit the europhobe-xenophobes (UKIP)but not a benefit really to the revolutionary left

[Viet Minh]

In general though would it bolster smaller parties and Independents, because I see that as a positive step towards Democracy. At the moment all we can do is vote for the lesser evil, based on their current stream of lies and political posturing.

[Tim Finnegan]

It's not much, but it's for the better. Anything which stands any chance at all of beginning to break up the two-and-a-half party stanglehold is a good thing in my book.

[bailey_187]

meh, wont make much difference. ill vote yes, but ill probably still not vote in the next general election.

[Spawn of Stalin]

At the moment all we can do is vote for the lesser evil

Oh you mean the Labour party huh?

OR, you could vote for any of the progressive parties that stand in elections.

OR, you could write something funny and provocative on your ballot paper.

OR, you could just stay at home.

Just a few examples of things that your can do on election day that are more productive than voting for right wing imperialists. Because honestly, voting is plain wack and there will never be a progressive government elected whether it is under the current system or any alternative proposed by the system.

I won't vote because frankly I don't care.

[Tim Finnegan]

Oh you mean the Labour party huh?

OR, you could vote for any of the progressive parties that stand in elections.

OR, you could write something funny and provocative on your ballot paper.

OR, you could just stay at home.

Just a few examples of things that your can do on election day that are more productive than voting for right wing imperialists.
...Assuming that you don't live in a Lab/Lib or Lab/Tory swing seat, in which, yes, they are inarguably the lesser of two evils. Sometimes we have to put realism above ideals.

[Demogorgon]

Replace one bad system with another, what a choice, eh? I'll vote yes on the grounds that a no vote will kill off the chance of anything else for fifteen years and maybe we can get Proportional Representation sooner.

That a developed countries in the twenty first century are still using single member districts to elect their Governments is amazing though.

[Communist Guy]

The the Communist Party of Britain are saying NO to AV as are a couple of other radical left groups.

I'd vote no, simply because it won't change anything much. AV isn't PR and it won't make the British electoral system any more democratic.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

In general though would it bolster smaller parties and Independents, because I see that as a positive step towards Democracy. At the moment all we can do is vote for the lesser evil, based on their current stream of lies and political posturing.
with av we will be able to vote for the lesser of 4 or 5 evils maybe, not a great improvement and it will bring us no closer to revolution.

[Tim Finnegan]

I'd vote no, simply because it won't change anything much. AV isn't PR and it won't make the British electoral system any more democratic.
I don't follow. Why is no progress better than imperfect progress?


Replace one bad system with another, what a choice, eh? I'll vote yes on the grounds that a no vote will kill off the chance of anything else for fifteen years and maybe we can get Proportional Representation sooner.
That's pretty much how I'm approaching it. AV isn't even halfway towards a decent system in itself, but if we let it slide by the establishment will be able to wave its failure and say "See? Everyone's happy with everything just the way it is!" This, at least, puts the option of further reform on the table.

[Communist Guy]

AV isn't any progress at all. Its just a tool to convince the masses that the system will be fairer. People have started to think of AV as PR, which it isn't. AV will change absolutely nothing but increase support for the right wing parties like the BNP.

[Tim Finnegan]

AV isn't any progress at all. Its just a tool to convince the masses that the system will be fairer.
Given that the Tories have uniformly rallied against it- on the very grounds that it is somehow unfair!- and with the cooperation of a not-inconsiderable column of Labourites, I have a hard time believing that it's some self-concious government scheme to dupe the populace. This isn't something that Groovy Dave & Co actually want, remember, it's just the price of their coalition, and they are hoping like hell that it fails. Not because they fear AV- as has been noted, that alone will do very little to shake things up- because it establishes the precedent for further reforms which threaten their hegemony over the parliamentary right.


People have started to think of AV as PR, which it isn't.Who? :confused:

[bailey_187]

AV isn't any progress at all. Its just a tool to convince the masses that the system will be fairer. People have started to think of AV as PR, which it isn't. AV will change absolutely nothing but increase support for the right wing parties like the BNP.

the way to beat the BNP isnt by making sure we have an electoral system that gives them a hard time u illiberal liberal

only reason the CPB opposes it is probably because it will loose labour votes

[Communist Guy]

the way to beat the BNP isnt by making sure we have an electoral system that gives them a hard time u illiberal liberal

only reason the CPB opposes it is probably because it will loose labour votes

Okay then, we should vote yes even though we know it will strengthen fascist parties.

But hey, it's okay, we'll beat them another way.


And the CPB will generally gain votes not lose them.

[Tim Finnegan]

Okay then, we should vote yes even though we know it will strengthen fascist parties.

But hey, it's okay, we'll beat them another way.
The logical conclusion of that position is to throw any pretence of democracy out the window altogether, and to save the working class from itself by embracing the benevolence of the one-party state. Which is nothing at all like fascism, amarite? :rolleyes:

[The Idler]

The the Communist Party of Britain are saying NO to AV as are a couple of other radical left groups.

I'd vote no, simply because it won't change anything much. AV isn't PR and it won't make the British electoral system any more democratic.
Socialism means winning the majority - Communist Party of Great ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Farticle.php%3Fa rticle_id%3D1004307&ei=d6iLTfndGcqAhQe8xty1Dg&usg=AFQjCNE_1CJd19ahHjRbsmytChayzuuB2A&sig2=o8Y9Qt6QPR8FTZ-ks0zZZQ)

[hatzel]

Okay then, we should vote yes even though we know it will strengthen fascist parties.

You cannot be serious...do you really judge everything in terms of negatives? Always thinking about what's bad for 'them' rather than good for yourself? Oh my, oh my...I never did much like people who defined themselves according to what they are against, rather than what they're for, and I know somebody, somewhere, said some witty and catchy line to that effect, but I can't remember who it was, so Google probably won't help me...if you've got any suggestions for the quote, please, submit them to me :)

[gorillafuck]

Lol at the people that are supposedly being realistic by voting labour. Communists aren't even close to being relevant enough to steal votes from the labour party so it doesn't matter whether communists vote for them or not.

[Manic Impressive]

Do any real socialist parties even stand candidates? I've never even heard of a leftist party standing for election here. But then again I'm in the South East and had the choice of 3 different reactionaries on my last ballot BNP, EDL and National Front.:crying:

[Tim Finnegan]

Lol at the people that are supposedly being realistic by voting labour. Communists aren't even close to being relevant enough to steal votes from the labour party so it doesn't matter whether communists vote for them or not.
Well, speaking for myself, it's not about the far-left vote, but about the working class vote in general. I'd hope that, in swing seats, people turn out for Labour over the Tories, Lib Dems and Tiny Plastic Flag Party, so I'd be a hypocrite not to do so myself. Call me self-indulgent, but I'd rather defend that part of my ideological integrity that depends on civil responsibility than that which depends on making a grand show of distancing myself from a party that nobody is likely to mistake me for a supporter of in the first place.


Do any real socialist parties even stand candidates? I've never even heard of a leftist party standing for election here. But then again I'm in the South East and had the choice of 3 different reactionaries on my last ballet BNP, EDL and National Front.:crying:
Occasionally some sort of electoral coalition will stand in a Labour safe seat, usually in a major city, but it's not particularly common. They're more likely to get involved in Local Council politics, where they occasionally stand a chance of achieving something. At the general election, it was the Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition (a name which was, with tragic accuracy, described as seeming almost intentionally designed to drive away voters), standing mostly in the North, the West Midlands, Inner London, and Scotland.

Oh, and up here you'll occasionally get the rump-Scottish Socialist Party, but the less said about that, frankly, the better.

[hatzel]

Do any real socialist parties even stand candidates? I've never even heard of a leftist party standing for election here. But then again I'm in the South East and had the choice of 3 different reactionaries on my last ballet BNP, EDL and National Front.:crying:

Yeah, same here...I remember during the mayoral election (though it might have been for...whatever else we voted for then...) there were three nominally socialist parties. f you include Respect. That was a record :)

[Demogorgon]

Okay then, we should vote yes even though we know it will strengthen fascist parties.

In the first instance AV is actually tougher on fascists than FPTP is. Other than that however are we supposed to oppose every conceivable democratic reform because it might "strengthen fascists"?

[hatzel]

In the first instance AV is actually tougher on fascists than FPTP is. Other than that however are we supposed to oppose every conceivable democratic reform because it might "strengthen fascists"?

Clearly. The best way to combat far-rightism is to totally ignore it as an ideology, fail to fight it intellectually, and instead just push for political reforms that make it tougher for them. Soon we'll be looking for those constituencies where the far-right have historically been quite powerful, and then merge them with a few neighbouring constituencies, to water down that influence...yeah...

I consider AV a worthwhile suggestion, even though I obviously think that PR is more worthwhile. As far as I'm concerned, you either vote in favour or just don't vote at all...I see no reason to retain the current system...

[Demogorgon]

Clearly. The best way to combat far-rightism is to totally ignore it as an ideology, fail to fight it intellectually, and instead just push for political reforms that make it tougher for them. Soon we'll be looking for those constituencies where the far-right have historically been quite powerful, and then merge them with a few neighbouring constituencies, to water down that influence...yeah...

I consider AV a worthwhile suggestion, even though I obviously think that PR is more worthwhile. As far as I'm concerned, you either vote in favour or just don't vote at all...I see no reason to retain the current system...
I could no more vote to keep fptp than I could join a march for capitalism, but I did give thought to spoiling the ballot. There was some talk in The Herald (Scottish Newspaper) of writing "proportional representation" onto the paper, but that would only have any effect if there was a large number of people doing it so there is little point.

As for the point about fascism, I agree. In France, that other European country clinging to the ridiculous single member system it looks fairly likely that the Socialists will win the next election and also that they have finally learned the lesson that Proportional Representation is better for them so France will either get PR or a half and half system. There you see the same arguments there about how PR benefits the Front National and so on. The difference there is that it is coming straight out of the mouths of the right looking to maintain the status quo with any kind of argument they can think of. The left have mostly grown out of that particular piece of nonsense.

[Viet Minh]

Do any real socialist parties even stand candidates? I've never even heard of a leftist party standing for election here. But then again I'm in the South East and had the choice of 3 different reactionaries on my last ballot BNP, EDL and National Front.:crying:

The EDL are standing in elections now?! :blink: Ah well, at least it splits the far right vote a bit I suppose..

As for PR if there's a serious amount of support maybe we should start a petition to the Government? Its a good idea to write it on the ballot but too risky if it meant losing the one chance for fairer representation.

[Demogorgon]

The EDL are standing in elections now?! :blink: Ah well, at least it splits the far right vote a bit I suppose..

As for PR if there's a serious amount of support maybe we should start a petition to the Government? Its a good idea to write it on the ballot but too risky if it meant losing the one chance for fairer representation.
It has to be said that PR is being increasingly used in Britain. It is used for all devolved bodies (though calling the Welsh system Proportional is stretching definitions rather and local Government elections in Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is also used for the European Parliament and will be used for the replacement to the Lords when that finally comes about, hopefully in the form of a list system but now that the Lib Dems are overseeing that change rather than labour it could be STV.

Those developments are more significant than an AV referendum I think. Even if AV passes the change will be less than the effect of Proportional Representation increasingly being used in other elections, hopefully that change will lead to a critical mass point.

On the day of the referendum after all Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will all be holding their own Proportional Elections (and don't get me started about the clash), that counts for more than the referendum I think.

[Manic Impressive]

The EDL are standing in elections now?! :blink: Ah well, at least it splits the far right vote a bit I suppose..

As for PR if there's a serious amount of support maybe we should start a petition to the Government? Its a good idea to write it on the ballot but too risky if it meant losing the one chance for fairer representation.
I'm pretty sure the EDL were on there although I could be mistaken, perhaps it was the English Democrats instead. tbh I was more shocked that there was an NF candidate standing, they did the wise thing in not putting their address on there.

[Viet Minh]

I'm pretty sure the EDL were on there although I could be mistaken, perhaps it was the English Democrats instead. tbh I was more shocked that there was an NF candidate standing, they did the wise thing in not putting their address on there.

There's a few splinter groups now, northwest nationalists think nick griffin is a jew-loving liberal commie :D :D :D :D

[Gorilla]

I don't follow. Why is no progress better than imperfect progress?

AV inherently favors parties of the mushy center.

In FPP you can win without the wavering middle voters by holding a core plurality together.

But in AV you have to get the wavering middle voters to mark you #2 to win.

A few present Labour voters will mark TUSC (or whatever) #1 under AV.

But the present Labour voters who don't mark TUSC #1 are unlikely to mark TUSC #2.

More likely, they'll mark the LibDems #2. (Maybe not this next election, but in general, they will.)

So basically, it's a bonanza for the LibDems and even worse for TUSC, Greens, CPGB etc.

[Demogorgon]

AV inherently favors parties of the mushy center.

In FPP you can win without the wavering middle voters by holding a core plurality together.

But in AV you have to get the wavering middle voters to mark you #2 to win.

A few present Labour voters will mark TUSC (or whatever) #1 under AV.

But the present Labour voters who don't mark TUSC #1 are unlikely to mark TUSC #2.

More likely, they'll mark the LibDems #2. (Maybe not this next election, but in general, they will.)

So basically, it's a bonanza for the LibDems and even worse for TUSC, Greens, CPGB etc.That isn't necessarily true. It really depends on the strength of parties. It can easily lead to a third place centrist party having its preferences going further to the left or further to the right. The classic example is Australia where Australian Democrat preferences had to go either to Labor or to Liberal/National. That is why AV is often accused of exaggerating swings.

Of course it can also favour the centre, it really depends. it is a bit like the way some people claim PR gives too much power to the centre and others claim it gives too much power to the extremes. Both statements can't be right, plainly the system itself isn't biased, it is simply reflecting electoral behaviour. It is a bit harder to claim that of AV, but the results it gives do change based on the political situation.

Make no mistake I don't like AV, but the thought of a vote that endorses FPTP sickens me, so I will have to vote yes.

[Gorilla]

That isn't necessarily true. It really depends on the strength of parties. It can easily lead to a third place centrist party having its preferences going further to the left or further to the right. The classic example is Australia where Australian Democrat preferences had to go either to Labor or to Liberal/National. That is why AV is often accused of exaggerating swings.

Well I wasn't mainly concerned with Labour so much as I was with left-of-Labour formations. I mean, in your example Australian Democrat preferences might go to Labour but they aren't likely to go to Communist Alliance or Help End Marijuana Prohibition.

The concrete example I'm thinking of is the seat where some of my relatives live in Ceredigion, which is marginal Libdem/Plaid, currently Libdem. Now I've got a lot of problems with Plaid but I think any system of fairer representation should leave representation for it.

And there is just no fucking way they will win that seat under AV. All the Tories and at least half the Labourites are strong anti-nationalists and will rank LD #2 to keep Plaid out. It'd be extinct everywhere except maybe Ynys Mon or some shit way up north.

Same thing in the district Galloway won for Respect. He was able to squeeze past Labour with a small plurality, but under AV all the Tory, Libdem, BNP voters would have ranked Labour #2 to shut him down.

AV is just terrible for small parties to the left of the main ones.

[Tim Finnegan]

AV inherently favors parties of the mushy center.
Because we've got such a strong, dynamic set of parties now?


So basically, it's a bonanza for the LibDems and even worse for TUSC, Greens, CPGB etc.I can see this being a kick in the nuts for the Greens and some of the nat' parties, but that's not exactly the most crippling blow the country's ever taken. As for the TUSC and other non-entities, how much worse could they actually do? At least this way, they may get a few more #1 votes, which is the closest they're going to come to success in the near future.

[hatzel]

If the TUSC and the Greens and Respect want to get more votes, how about they actually put out a decent manifesto that appeals to people for once, rather than just kvetching about the election system? :confused: Me, I've never seen a single piece of propaganda from any of these parties (without explicitly searching for it), and wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of people had no idea who they were or what they stood for...changing the election system isn't going to suddenly make people know who they are...


Tim's right, though, as far as I can see, people knowing that they can vote for a minor party as their first choice, and vote for their favourite of the major parties on the second (just to keep the Conservatives out :lol:) seems better to me than the current system, where many people wouldn't vote for these fringe parties, because they know they have to vote for a major one, as otherwise they're wasting a vote that could otherwise be used to make sure the Conservatives don't take the seat. Or whatever. I dunno.

[Demogorgon]

I'm not sure if AV is that bad for the nationalist parties anyway, possibly Plaid Cymru, but the SNP are unlikely to be that affected wither way for it and the seem to be softly supportive of it as a step towards the STV system they are really after.

The thing is the Labour and SNP parties hate each other with a burning passion, but part of the reason they hate each other so much is that they are competing for exactly the same voter base. I suspect that for all the rivalry the parties have for one another, their voters will end up preferencing each other.

[Viet Minh]

I'm not sure if AV is that bad for the nationalist parties anyway, possibly Plaid Cymru, but the SNP are unlikely to be that affected wither way for it and the seem to be softly supportive of it as a step towards the STV system they are really after.

The thing is the Labour and SNP parties hate each other with a burning passion, but part of the reason they hate each other so much is that they are competing for exactly the same voter base. I suspect that for all the rivalry the parties have for one another, their voters will end up preferencing each other.

I assume you're an SNP supporter? What exactly is their stance? They started out as a Socialist party, or at least their founding members were Socialist, but then for the longest time they were called the tartan tories, then they adopted a more leftist rhetoric, now they support the Monarchy?! :confused:

[Demogorgon]

I assume you're an SNP supporter? What exactly is their stance? They started out as a Socialist party, or at least their founding members were Socialist, but then for the longest time they were called the tartan tories, then they adopted a more leftist rhetoric, now they support the Monarchy?! :confused:
I'm not an SNP supporter or an anyone else in Parliament supporter for that matter, though naturally I acknowledge that some parties are worse than others (the Tories are the worst obviously). I was a Scottish Socialist, but we all know how that turned out...

On the principle however that I will give an opinion on anything at any opportunity, I will comment on the SNP. To be fair the "Tartan Tories" thing was always a load of rubbish, a Labour phrase used to attack them. The real basis of it was the collapse of the Callaghan Government in 1979. Labour had lost their majority back then and had a Confidence and Supply agreement with the SNP. Anyway after the Devolution referendum which yielded a Yes vote but not the 40% of the total electorate requirement the SNP demanded Devolution be implemented anyway on the basis of the yes, which Callaghan actually agreed to attempt, but when it became clear his backbenchers would not allow it, the SNP withdrew support for the Governemnt and an early election had to be called.

Labour argue that had Callaghan had his last few months, he could have regained his popularity and defeated Thatcher and it was the SNPs fault she got it. I find that something of a stretch given labour was the architect of its own destruction there. The SNP had already given Labour way too much leeway tolerating First Past the Post for the devolved Parliament and not giving it primary legislative powers (both problems removed in the devolution that finally happened), failing to implement it at all was simply the last straw.

As for the monarchy, I wouldn't call them monarchists. Their position is that there should be a referendum on the monarchy and if it is retained the Swedish and Japanese models of any remaining political roles being removed should be adopted. That is more Soft Republicanism than anything else.

[StockholmSyndrome]

voting is plain wack and there will never be a progressive government elected whether it is under the current system or any alternative proposed by the system.

I won't vote because frankly I don't care.

I despise this attitude.

[Hen]

The current referendum is part of a ‘blame the system’ culture, and feeds the lie that our problems can be solved simply by reforming institutions and procedures.
Just as regulating banks proves ineffective without virtuous bankers, changing the voting system will make no difference if the political and social culture is one of self-interest and careerism instead of public service and dedication to the common good.

[Tim Finnegan]

The current referendum is part of a ‘blame the system’ culture, and feeds the lie that our problems can be solved simply by reforming institutions and procedures.
I'm not sure that I've seen anyone suggesting this of the proposal in question.