Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Green Party - time for reflection

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The Green Party - time for reflection

    There’s been a lot said, quite rightly, about how Labour have to reflect on their recent general election loss. How much more true, however, this is for the Green Party, for whom I extensively campaigned in the run-up to the last election.

    It is clear from its dismal polling that the Green Party is out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people in towns. Time and again on the doorstep I heard the message that “all this ecological climate stuff’s a load of nonsense if you ask me, if there’s global warming how come it’s so perishing cold and that Swedish girl, she should be in school and all. That Lucas woman needs a wash and 20p for a plastic bag? It’s a disgrace. I’m voting Boris. He’s good on the immigrants too.”

    We must listen to these very real concerns very carefully indeed if we are to maintain electoral credibility. Clearly, our purism, our metropolitan obsession with recycling and unrealistic plans such as getting people to use cars and planes less are alienating the very people we are trying to save.

    Yes, in a perfect world it would be nice to save the world but we’ve no chance of doing that if we insist on harking back to the bad old days of the 1970s, all those sandals and anti-nuclear protests and lentil stews.

    For that reason, I propose that the Green Party ditches its “doom and gloom” message about climate change and focusses on the more positive aspects of the environment which appeal to the electorate - in particular, gardening. Let’s make us the Gardening Party! What’s greener than that? Instead of the Green Party making people think of smelly young men with dreadlocks up trees protesting against much-needed - yes, I’m not afraid to think the unthinkable! - much-needed motorway extensions, I want them to think of lawns, shears, pesticides, rhododendrons. And Joanna Lumley, our next leader for my money!

    Further policies;

    - ABOLISH the 20p surcharge of plastic bags and use the money for research into sharper secateurs suitable for the elderly.

    - ALL Green Party MPs to wash on a daily basis, with their ablutions recorded in a Register of Hygiene

    - REPLACE all dogmatic references to “Climate Change” in our manifesto, instead laying emphasis on ideas such as “Hope”, “Aspiration” and “Choice”.

    - WORK with the Swedish school authorities to tighten up truancy laws

    - CURB immigration drastically. When people come to work here, many of them drive around in cars and breathe our clean air. By reducing immigration, we’ll also be reducing air pollution.

    -RENAME ourselves the Yellow Party. Yellow, the traditional colour of courage and boldness, the boldness we will need as we forge ahead into a bright future!

    #2
    I laughed. OK, I didn't really. May need to modify that slogan mentioned on another thread. Gardner can fuck off to gardening...

    Comment


      #3
      Stores should just flat out not offer plastic bags. Make everyone buy a reusable one or go back to the paper ones which can be made of recycled material and even if they aren't will decompose.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
        Stores should just flat out not offer plastic bags. Make everyone buy a reusable one or go back to the paper ones which can be made of recycled material and even if they aren't will decompose.

        We've got a problem over here of people treating the reusable bags as single-use items.

        Comment


          #5
          Then make them out of hemp or somesuch.

          Comment


            #6
            Same problem

            Comment


              #7
              But they won't cause as much pollution and people are more likely to hold onto and reuse a $5 bag than a 25c bag.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
                But they won't cause as much pollution and people are more likely to hold onto and reuse a $5 bag than a 25c bag.
                As long as you reuse them a few hundred times (I forget the exact number).

                Comment


                  #9
                  I get it, but possibly using another political party is a bit confusing. Tesco reflecting on its purpose?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Funnily enough I was looking at a breakdown of the 2019 GE results recently and one of the things which leapt out at me was that only 30% of Green voters in the 2017 GE voted for them two-and-a-half years later, which I found astonishing for a party that I thought was on an upwards trajectory. Of the rest of that 2017 vote, 34% went to Labour (substantially Remainers attempting to secure a second referendum, presumably), 15% to the LibDems (same reason), 10% to the Conservatives (there's a sizeable Leave minority amongst Greens, I believe), 6% to the SNP and 5% to Others.

                    Their new votes came from across the political spectrum, but were mainly from the LibDems & Labour.

                    Thoughts Duncan Gardner
                    Last edited by Nocturnal Submission; 10-01-2020, 11:45.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I guess I went Green to Labour, 2017 to 2019.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        30% of Greens wouldn’t ‘substantially’ shift to Labour just for a 2nd ref, I don’t think

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I think, more likely, for the GND and economic policies.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Seriously though, the Green Party is always going to be thought of as a single issue party because that's it's bloody name. If it's not about vegans banning cars and making every poor bugger walk to work on a lentil breakfast then why is it called the Green Party?

                            I don't know what to suggest as a rebrand but something about ensuring there is actually a world to live in through a progressive approach to development would sound better. At the moment the name conjures up images of virtuous killjoys tutting because you bought a ready meal on your way home after a 10 hour shift. All that stuff that Orwell wrote about middle class people eating Ryvita springs to mind.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I'm another Green to Labour 17/19 voter. I couldn't pretend that the electoral system we have doesn't exist.

                              Also, people on here have opened my eyes a bit to how, unfocused, the greens are once you get past the green issues.

                              I was thinking during the election about how a prevailing worry in the 80s and 90s was that the UK was heading towards being a two party system. It never happened, and probably wont now if the SNP keep up their vote but when push comes to shove there are only two real choices for governement with FPTP.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                On Greens unfocused beyond environment: ...see Austria

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by NS
                                  Funnily enough I was looking at a breakdown of the 2019 GE results recently and one of the things which leapt out at me was that only 30% of Green voters in the 2017 GE voted for them two-and-a-half years later, which I found astonishing for a party that I thought was on an upwards trajectory
                                  Thanks NS. Do you have more detail or a link? Of course there can be a significant turnover of voters for smaller parties, but 70% in 2 years is much higher than I'd have expected , especially given that our overall vote in Englandand Wales rose by 60% to more than 800,000

                                  Originally posted by PT
                                  Seriously though, the Green Party is always going to be thought of as a single issue party because that's it's bloody name
                                  Same applies to some other parties I can think of And to the theme of the recent General Election.

                                  I'm comfortable with the Green name and doubt changing it would make any significant difference.

                                  As for George Orwell, I struggle to live in the moment as it is. There's little to be gained in harking back to 1948 over and again...

                                  Originally posted by FIGS
                                  On Greens unfocused beyond environment: ...see Austria
                                  We can reasonably be criticised for lack of focus both within and beyond environmentalism, all over the World. Getting 3% in a national election has that effect. There's a delicate balance between acknowledging that failure and getting too despondent

                                  Originally posted by Levin
                                  I couldn't pretend that the electoral system we have doesn't exist... a prevailing worry in the 80s and 90s was that the UK was heading towards being a two party system. It never happened, and probably wont now if the SNP keep up their vote but when push comes to shove there are only two real choices for governement with FPTP
                                  Variously:

                                  - 1 parties (and even individual voters) can have a fair bit of influence within the existing system. By co-operating with the other opposition, giving ground as well as demanding it, that sort of thing...

                                  - 2 for those of us born in the early 60s, there was a 2-party system for decades. In 2010, Labour had been in Government for 24 years- half my lifetime

                                  - 3 the SNP will likely take a hit when Salmond's sexual assault trial starts, esp if Sturgeon is shown to have lied about how much she knew. But more importantly, Labour floundering on 18% in Scotland are unlikely to be able to take advantage

                                  - 4 the UK could well not exist for much longer (even NI is now a 3-bloc system with plenty of Unionists moving to non-Nationalist, non-Unionist parties)

                                  - 5 December's result suggests there's only one realistic winner if the Opposition/ Left/ Remainers are so divided. See (1) above

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    I think a lot of Green votes in parliamentary elections go up and down with tactical considerations more than people no longer thinking the party represents them (of course that does occur too).
                                    (there's a sizeable Leave minority amongst Greens, I believe)
                                    In the referendum less Greens voted for Brexit than any other party including Lib Dems but yes there are some Leave Greens.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by Duncan Gardner View Post

                                      Thanks NS. Do you have more detail or a link? Of course there can be a significant turnover of voters for smaller parties, but 70% in 2 years is much higher than I'd have expected , especially given that our overall vote in Englandand Wales rose by 60% to more than 800,000
                                      Sure, Dunc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_U...ection#Results Scroll down - it's the penultimate table.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Thanks NS

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by Stumpy Pepys View Post

                                          As long as you reuse them a few hundred times (I forget the exact number).
                                          Nah, that's not how it works. it's not about how much the reusable bag costs, it's There are just way fewer bags used overall. We were the first to introduce this back in 2002, and We went from using a billion plastic bags a year, to under a hundred million, almost overnight. The number has wobbled a bit, and has gradually trended downwards, but they used to give you plastic bags at even the slightest excuse. It's not so much that people are using reusable bags, it's that they're not getting a plastic bag to carry just a loaf of bread or a pint of milk.

                                          The core of the issue is simply a tragedy of the commons, where if there's no charge for using something, then it gets used far beyond the optimal level, because you've completely broken the link between the cost of something to you, and its cost to society. You can see this all over the place. A lot of it has to do with Oil. The biggest areas that I can see are 0% tax on aviation fuel (You'd see a very different aviation industry if people had to pay the social cost of the aviation fuel, and it was three or four times more expensive) also Petrol, where particularly in the US the price is way too low in relation to its cost to society. Through super cheap plastic packaging, which costs virtually nothing to make because a) oil is so cheap b) you don't have to worry about disposing of it. But this extends further in Car related matters, in the absence of road pricing. In all cases, traffic congestion, and unbridled car growth comes down to the absence of road pricing. You are allocating a scarce and costly commodity (road space) by queueing, and instead of charging for marginal use, you are paying your tax to buy the car, and your road tax. The absence of road pricing, and the artificially low price of oil act as an indirect subsidy to car drivers, and making it more attractive than using public transport.

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            I don't know if you've missed Stumpy's point, but you've not addressed it. Obviously the charge has reduced the use of plastic bags massively, but the reusable bags use much more resource. The argument is summarised here (https://www.smartcompany.com.au/indu...shopping-bags/) - first link I could find, I'm not saying it's accurate but it's showing the dilemma.

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by Duncan Gardner View Post

                                              Same applies to some other parties I can think of And to the theme of the recent General Election.

                                              I'm comfortable with the Green name and doubt changing it would make any significant difference.

                                              As for George Orwell, I struggle to live in the moment as it is. There's little to be gained in harking back to 1948 over and again...
                                              Well as long as you're happy with the status quo why consider changing. The Orwell reference is about how the concerns of the middle classes don't apply below their insulated bubble. Why worry about the planet if you can't afford to heat your home in the winter, or give your kids breakfast? I'm not singling out the Greens for criticism. There are no parties proposing radical new approaches to living together on a dying planet. It's all a variation of the same old, same old. You'll still go to work, just not in a car. You'll still go shopping, but with a cloth bag.


                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                Good discussion, this but I must stress that when I wrote the OP I didn’t have the Green Party in mind at all.

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  If you're doing this sort of thing though, You're primarily doing it for litter reasons. The energy calculations are really kind of secondary. though still strongly positive. It's all about the nine bags that you don't use.
                                                  Last edited by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!; 10-01-2020, 14:22.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X