What would middle-class rebellion look like?
Discussion
We've all seen riots in the streets, be it here or elsewhere... They tend to draw a lot of attention, but at the risk of stereotyping the rioters, I think it's probably safe to say that those burning cars and looting shops probably don't as a rule own the cars in question, nor work in, supply or insure the shops.
So what happens when levels of dissatisfaction amongst those who do own the cars or the shops and work therein reaches a similar boiling point?
It increasingly looks like Boris and co are going to extend Covid restrictions beyond the 21st, and whether or not you personally believe that's a sensible, rational decision or utterly bonkers - and let's not discuss that on this thread, as there are plenty of others for that - I'm sure you wouldn't disagree that a significant and increasing proportion of the population are losing all patience with this, so how do they respond?
There isn't going to be an election for several years, and even if there was, is there really an alternative to vote for? The ballot box doesn't really seem to hold any answers at the moment that I can see.
Rioting isn't an option for the vast majority, as most people's moral compasses would make them think about the owner of the small business before they put a brick through the window.
General strikes are all well and good when you've got a union to help support you, and hopefully it'll have a quick impact, but again, hardly a great option for the middle classes, especially when part of the anger comes from how much harder it has been to keep up the mortgage payments over the last year!
Mass refusals to pay taxes have carried weight in the past, but again, unless you can persuade your employer's finance and HR teams not to make contributions through PAYE before you even get the money, it's not the most practical of options either!
You can start a petition on the No10 website thingy, and who knows, it might even result in a debate in parliament, at which point there's be lots of waffle, and precisely nothing will change.
Short of leaving the country - and even then, how many countries are all that different? - it just increasingly feels like there's no option but to just put up with it all!
Personally, I think Tony Blair is to blame for all of it. By moving Labour to the centre ground, he forced the Tories to do likewise to compete for the middle ground voters, and Cameron et al have been able to do this safe in the knowledge that they really don't have to do much for their core voters, because they're relying on those core voters not being able to see any remotely more attractive options.
I reckon the best way for the middle classes to rebel would be to somehow force through proportional representation in parliament, so that way at least it would be a little easier, when we're in this situation, for new parties who do represent the opinions of some of the ignored masses to gain a foothold. Of course, that still brings us back to the starting point though - how do you force that change in the first place?
So what happens when levels of dissatisfaction amongst those who do own the cars or the shops and work therein reaches a similar boiling point?
It increasingly looks like Boris and co are going to extend Covid restrictions beyond the 21st, and whether or not you personally believe that's a sensible, rational decision or utterly bonkers - and let's not discuss that on this thread, as there are plenty of others for that - I'm sure you wouldn't disagree that a significant and increasing proportion of the population are losing all patience with this, so how do they respond?
There isn't going to be an election for several years, and even if there was, is there really an alternative to vote for? The ballot box doesn't really seem to hold any answers at the moment that I can see.
Rioting isn't an option for the vast majority, as most people's moral compasses would make them think about the owner of the small business before they put a brick through the window.
General strikes are all well and good when you've got a union to help support you, and hopefully it'll have a quick impact, but again, hardly a great option for the middle classes, especially when part of the anger comes from how much harder it has been to keep up the mortgage payments over the last year!
Mass refusals to pay taxes have carried weight in the past, but again, unless you can persuade your employer's finance and HR teams not to make contributions through PAYE before you even get the money, it's not the most practical of options either!
You can start a petition on the No10 website thingy, and who knows, it might even result in a debate in parliament, at which point there's be lots of waffle, and precisely nothing will change.
Short of leaving the country - and even then, how many countries are all that different? - it just increasingly feels like there's no option but to just put up with it all!
Personally, I think Tony Blair is to blame for all of it. By moving Labour to the centre ground, he forced the Tories to do likewise to compete for the middle ground voters, and Cameron et al have been able to do this safe in the knowledge that they really don't have to do much for their core voters, because they're relying on those core voters not being able to see any remotely more attractive options.
I reckon the best way for the middle classes to rebel would be to somehow force through proportional representation in parliament, so that way at least it would be a little easier, when we're in this situation, for new parties who do represent the opinions of some of the ignored masses to gain a foothold. Of course, that still brings us back to the starting point though - how do you force that change in the first place?
A lot of tutting.
You don’t have to riot to protest about things. A peaceful demonstration can send a message (although it’s still easy to ignore). The anti-Brexit March drew a couple hundred thousand onto the streets in London and I imagine that was well populated by middle class and those who would not normally take to the streets. Was very peaceful with no trouble but was all too easy to ignore. (Don’t turn this into a Brexit thread, merely using it as an example).
Politicians worry about polls. If people actually started saying they were unhappy and would not vote for the incumbent next time around, you may see a different result. Instead people, bizarrely, are happy and Boris is polling quite strongly so that will only embolden his decision making into further or longer restrictions rather than releasing them.
At the end of the day, we are a compliant nation and tend to put up with a lot of s
t. Nothing will happen except social media going off on one and a few letters to the Times.
Oh, and fk off with your Blair bit. Tories have been in for ages. Take some ownership.
You don’t have to riot to protest about things. A peaceful demonstration can send a message (although it’s still easy to ignore). The anti-Brexit March drew a couple hundred thousand onto the streets in London and I imagine that was well populated by middle class and those who would not normally take to the streets. Was very peaceful with no trouble but was all too easy to ignore. (Don’t turn this into a Brexit thread, merely using it as an example).
Politicians worry about polls. If people actually started saying they were unhappy and would not vote for the incumbent next time around, you may see a different result. Instead people, bizarrely, are happy and Boris is polling quite strongly so that will only embolden his decision making into further or longer restrictions rather than releasing them.
At the end of the day, we are a compliant nation and tend to put up with a lot of s
t. Nothing will happen except social media going off on one and a few letters to the Times.Oh, and f
k off with your Blair bit. Tories have been in for ages. Take some ownership.bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Handling of a pandemic by a Government that's been in power for 11 years and it's all Tony Blair's fault.
Brilliant
More a case that getting to the point where most of the middle classes have nobody to vote for that really represents them is the part that's Blair's fault.Brilliant
You wouldn't get what you wanted by playing within the rules.
You honestly think you'd ever get a 'revolution' that was different from any previous ones? It's never the 'workers' that lead them, at least not the ones that succeed in creating change.
But if you want the best answer you're likely to get then the way to get what you want from politics is to find the people who can give it to you, and to give them a bung.
Bribery - it works. Anything else is pissing into the wind.
You honestly think you'd ever get a 'revolution' that was different from any previous ones? It's never the 'workers' that lead them, at least not the ones that succeed in creating change.
But if you want the best answer you're likely to get then the way to get what you want from politics is to find the people who can give it to you, and to give them a bung.
Bribery - it works. Anything else is pissing into the wind.
It’s why furlough exists. Prevents the middle classes from gaining the numbers to riot as only a minority are ineligible to claim any monetary help for loss of work during the ‘crisis’.
If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
BabySharkDooDooDooDooDooDoo said:
It’s why furlough exists. Prevents the middle classes from gaining the numbers to riot as only a minority are ineligible to claim any monetary help for loss of work during the ‘crisis’.
If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
Possibly I'm missing something but surely a scheme that helps "most people" (regardless of class) is what a sensible scheme should be doing? The minority could still claim either UC or 80% of the "salary" they were paying themselves. Admittedly they couldn't claim 80% of the dividends that they were paying themselves or any money their PSC was putting into their pension fund but that isn't the majority of people.If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
P.s. if furlough hadn't existed you would simply have had more people flouting lockdown and restrictions.
Kermit power said:
More a case that getting to the point where most of the middle classes have nobody to vote for that really represents them is the part that's Blair's fault.
Whatever you might think of him the man won three elections with stonking majorities which suggests he has some idea what the middle classes want(ed).It isn't Blair's fault that the choice at the last election was between two candidates who were (and are) unfit for public office.
Want to know why you've got the Government you've got?
Look in the mirror I'm afraid.
valiant said:
A lot of tutting.
You don’t have to riot to protest about things. A peaceful demonstration can send a message (although it’s still easy to ignore). The anti-Brexit March drew a couple hundred thousand onto the streets in London and I imagine that was well populated by middle class and those who would not normally take to the streets. Was very peaceful with no trouble but was all too easy to ignore. (Don’t turn this into a Brexit thread, merely using it as an example).
Politicians worry about polls. If people actually started saying they were unhappy and would not vote for the incumbent next time around, you may see a different result. Instead people, bizarrely, are happy and Boris is polling quite strongly so that will only embolden his decision making into further or longer restrictions rather than releasing them.
At the end of the day, we are a compliant nation and tend to put up with a lot of st. Nothing will happen except social media going off on one and a few letters to the Times.
Oh, and fk off with your Blair bit. Tories have been in for ages. Take some ownership.
You're missing the point on the Blair bit.You don’t have to riot to protest about things. A peaceful demonstration can send a message (although it’s still easy to ignore). The anti-Brexit March drew a couple hundred thousand onto the streets in London and I imagine that was well populated by middle class and those who would not normally take to the streets. Was very peaceful with no trouble but was all too easy to ignore. (Don’t turn this into a Brexit thread, merely using it as an example).
Politicians worry about polls. If people actually started saying they were unhappy and would not vote for the incumbent next time around, you may see a different result. Instead people, bizarrely, are happy and Boris is polling quite strongly so that will only embolden his decision making into further or longer restrictions rather than releasing them.
At the end of the day, we are a compliant nation and tend to put up with a lot of s
t. Nothing will happen except social media going off on one and a few letters to the Times.Oh, and f
k off with your Blair bit. Tories have been in for ages. Take some ownership.We used to have partisan politics in this country. Labour represented the left and the working classes, the Tories the right and the middle classes.
The Tories could by and large win elections with policies that appealed to those moderate right-wing middle-class voters, and they would dangle the carrot of being able to join those classes to enough of the Labour-leaning floating voters in the middle to get them over the line.
Blair realised that Labour would never retain power - only he, Atlee and Wilson have ever managed to do that as Labour PMs in over a century, and Atlee barely counted - if they carried on appealing to the left, so he moved the party wholesale to the centre ground. As the Telegraph editorial said during one of the Tory party leadership elections at the time, the best candidate to lead the Tory party wasn't standing, as he was rather busy being Labour Prime Minister.
By making that shift to the right, he was banking on the traditional Labour vote carrying on supporting him regardless, because who else did they have to vote for? And that policy worked out well for him, and largely continued to do so right up until the current era and the collapse of the red wall in the North.
Similarly, the Tories responded by moving to the left, equally taking much of their core vote for granted, for precisely the same reason. That hasn't really come back to bite them, but I certainly think it was a major contributor to Brexit, as it allowed UKIP to milk much of the disenchantment.
As a result of this, for most of the past two decades, we've had a political system where only two Centrist parties have any chance of winning, and they've been been largely indistinguishable. If we had PR, then I'm sure by now that new parties on both the left and the right would've started to gain more traction and representation in parliament, and not so many would feel completely disenfranchised.
In short, Blair's actions exposed the weaknesses of our current voting system.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:Kermit power said:
More a case that getting to the point where most of the middle classes have nobody to vote for that really represents them is the part that's Blair's fault.
Whatever you might think of him the man won three elections with stonking majorities which suggests he has some idea what the middle classes want(ed).It isn't Blair's fault that the choice at the last election was between two candidates who were (and are) unfit for public office.
Want to know why you've got the Government you've got?
Look in the mirror I'm afraid.
As for the last election, for the first time in my life, I didn't vote Conservative. More importantly, I also voted in favour of PR when that was put to a referendum. I can look in the mirror with a clear conscience.
Countdown said:
BabySharkDooDooDooDooDooDoo said:
It’s why furlough exists. Prevents the middle classes from gaining the numbers to riot as only a minority are ineligible to claim any monetary help for loss of work during the ‘crisis’.
If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
Possibly I'm missing something but surely a scheme that helps "most people" (regardless of class) is what a sensible scheme should be doing? The minority could still claim either UC or 80% of the "salary" they were paying themselves. Admittedly they couldn't claim 80% of the dividends that they were paying themselves or any money their PSC was putting into their pension fund but that isn't the majority of people.If furlough didn’t exist you’d have far fewer people sneering at those suffering from the effects of government actions.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff