Can Americans please stop exporting their politics please?

[s_stabeler]

I just read an article in the news in the UK about an attack by the Remain campaign in the UK (they want to remain in the EU. the Leave campaign want to leave the EU. There if a referendum in a couple of weeks on if we should stay in the EU or not. Currently, it looks like the result will be to stay in, but there's no way to be sure,) on the Leave campaign. it's usual political fare- accusing the Leave campaign of scaremongering (which is probably true- both sides have done it, but I've noticed it more from the Leave side) and the Leave campaign's response? to attack Cameron for speaking alongside people fro the Labour, Lib Dem and Green parties.

Basically, I'm somewhat irritated that it seems that the "us against them" mentality that is the problem with US politics seems to be spreading.(I actually like the fact that the Conservatiive, Lib Dem, Green and Labour leadership appear to be uniting in support of the Remain campaign, since it proves they care more about the actual issue than political point-scoring. I may have political issues with the main three parities that means i won't be voting for them at the next General Election (to sum up, I find Corbyn dangerously naive, and I have issues with the basic humanity of some of the Conservatives' policies. as for the Lib ems, i don't particularly trust them to stand up to the Conservatiives or Labour.)

[Kheldarson]

l

Basically, I'm somewhat irritated that it seems that the "us against them" mentality that is the problem with US politics seems to be spreading

It's not that it's spreading, I think, so much as a multiparty system doesn't have much chance to show it. Because of our two party system, we Americans get easily embroiled in our differences, minute as they really are, and the parties encourage that - some more than others.

So now you have an issue that only has two sides to it, this sort of petty nonsense has a chance to rear its head.

[wolfie]

So Britain has (at least) 4 major parties, and there's an issue with only 2 outcomes. Why is the "Leave" campaign surprised that at least 2 parties are going to be on the same side of the issue?

[s_stabeler]

it's more that the big figures in the Leave campaign are complaining that, effectively, Party discipline has not been enforced on the issue.(forgetting, perhaps, that if it was, they wouldn't be allowed to campaign to leave.

Essentially, the issue is them effectively demanding that the Conservative leadership never co-operate with the Labour leadership. THAT is the problem- they are arguing that something being supported by Labour means the Conservatives should oppose it. No matter what. That's a recipe for trouble.

Or, to sum up: the Leave leadership are trying to say that party membership should be more important than your own opinion on a topic. That, more than anything, is the issue with American politics. I'd rather not see it in the UK, which has a rich tradition of MPs giving the government the finger if they disagree.

[wolfie]

In other words, the Leave campaign is ticked off that members of the major parties are saying "This is a good idea, I'll support it - doesn't matter that my party's main rival is also supporting it"? That's how a democracy is SUPPOSED to work - each MP (British/Canadian equivalent of Congresscritter) takes a stand on each issue that they believe is best for their constituents, and a party is merely a group of people who tend to lean in the same direction on more issues than they disagree on.

[TheHuckster]

I tell you. 20 years from now we'll have one side saying we should outlaw puppy kicking contests and the other taking the contrarian view "just on principle"

[EricKei]

SS - If it makes you feel any better, we don't like the needlessly adversarial way our politics work much, either x.x

TheHuckster - I do believe the common term for that is "Playing Devil's Advocate." As much as I would like to think that such a thing would only EVER be done as a theoretical exercise in the context of a debate (its normal usage), it would not surprise me if somewhere out there, someone really does fervently believe in one such perfectly preposterous pro-puppy-pummeling position.

[s_stabeler]

TheHuckster - I do believe the common term for that is "Playing Devil's Advocate." As much as I would like to think that such a thing would only EVER be done as a theoretical exercise in the context of a debate (its normal usage), it would not surprise me if somewhere out there, someone really does fervently believe in one such perfectly preposterous pro-puppy-pummeling position.

The thing is, playing Devil's Advocate isn't exactly as simple as taking the exact opposite opinion- the entire point is to stimulate debate.(basically, you are arguing the point not because you actually believe they are wrong, but to help them see possible problems with their argument. It's arguing for the sake of arguing- wheras in that case, you would seriously be trying to argue for manatoory puppy-kicking.

Not to mention how the entire referendum is not shaping up to be a pointless exercise- there have already been suggestions to resist leaving the EU if the vote goes for Brexit, and I remember the leave campaign suggesting they might demand a second referendum. It was supposed to draw a line under the situation- all it's done has caused both sides to entrench.