If we had a good electoral system then I would agree with you but the FPTP one tends to distort and limit public opinion. That's why we ended up with Thatcher for 11 years despite her never getting a majority of the vote. For a lot of people their votes are pretty much wasted as they will effectively be ignored because the candidate who gets the most votes, even if its only somewhere in the low 30% gets elected and the rest have no impact. Also at the last election it was still expected that Brexit would occur and a lot of other issues were important.
I suspect that this time around it will be virtually all about Brexit which will give a lot more clarity. Britain needs to leave as its the only way to prevent further deep division and then hopefully we will be able to concentrate more on our internal problems.
Yes a deal should be a balance of the desires of the two sides. However it tends to be affected by the determination of the two and their relative power. With a substantial minority of hard line remainers refusing to accept any agreement and a weak government which for the 1st few years were also unwilling to fully support leaving we have got a poor deal, which has only been improved somewhat in the last couple of months. Frankly it was a mistake allowing the EU to insist that everything had to be done in two stages instead of one, right from the start. If it had been done responsibly then things might be a lot closer to being resolved by now. Also we wouldn't have the problem of having given the EU just about everything they want, no matter how extreme, when we enter the 2nd stage of the leaving negotiations I fully expect them to seek to put as many restrictions on Britain as they can get away with. Suspect that the Tories who are thinking that the obvious free trade deal will be accepted will find themselves very disappointed and there will be continued attempt to limit Britain's external trade and control its economy.
They may not have tried to punish Britain but they have talked about the need for it so frequently and they have imposed severe terms that will damage both sides but Britain more.
Yes there was a failure to resolve Britain's own problems in the 60's and 70's and two mistakes in the latter decade, joining the EEC and allowing Thatcherism to take root have greatly weakened Britain. A nation that used to look outwards has become too introvert and too many in this country rejects the idea of Britain actually being capable of governing ourselves.
I'm not sure the world is harsher now, although the rise of autocratic blocs and powers is making it harder. There is however I think plenty of scope for well organised medium side powers to move nimbly between the titans who often stagger under their own weight. The EU is distracted by Brexit at the moment but when this is hopefully successfully resolved it will still have to go back to its other problems of growing central control and imbalance of internal power. Have to see how it fares then.
60
@Dasneko
If we had a good electoral system then I would agree with you but the FPTP one tends to distort and limit public opinion. That's why we ended up with Thatcher for 11 years despite her never getting a majority of the vote. For a lot of people their votes are pretty much wasted as they will effectively be ignored because the candidate who gets the most votes, even if its only somewhere in the low 30% gets elected and the rest have no impact. Also at the last election it was still expected that Brexit would occur and a lot of other issues were important.
I suspect that this time around it will be virtually all about Brexit which will give a lot more clarity. Britain needs to leave as its the only way to prevent further deep division and then hopefully we will be able to concentrate more on our internal problems.
Yes a deal should be a balance of the desires of the two sides. However it tends to be affected by the determination of the two and their relative power. With a substantial minority of hard line remainers refusing to accept any agreement and a weak government which for the 1st few years were also unwilling to fully support leaving we have got a poor deal, which has only been improved somewhat in the last couple of months. Frankly it was a mistake allowing the EU to insist that everything had to be done in two stages instead of one, right from the start. If it had been done responsibly then things might be a lot closer to being resolved by now. Also we wouldn't have the problem of having given the EU just about everything they want, no matter how extreme, when we enter the 2nd stage of the leaving negotiations I fully expect them to seek to put as many restrictions on Britain as they can get away with. Suspect that the Tories who are thinking that the obvious free trade deal will be accepted will find themselves very disappointed and there will be continued attempt to limit Britain's external trade and control its economy.
They may not have tried to punish Britain but they have talked about the need for it so frequently and they have imposed severe terms that will damage both sides but Britain more.
Yes there was a failure to resolve Britain's own problems in the 60's and 70's and two mistakes in the latter decade, joining the EEC and allowing Thatcherism to take root have greatly weakened Britain. A nation that used to look outwards has become too introvert and too many in this country rejects the idea of Britain actually being capable of governing ourselves.
I'm not sure the world is harsher now, although the rise of autocratic blocs and powers is making it harder. There is however I think plenty of scope for well organised medium side powers to move nimbly between the titans who often stagger under their own weight. The EU is distracted by Brexit at the moment but when this is hopefully successfully resolved it will still have to go back to its other problems of growing central control and imbalance of internal power. Have to see how it fares then.