One person one vote

[Dilligaf]

I put my faith in the Darwinism box.
Otherwise there is no point in striving for achievement really.

Hmm but answer me this. Most here would subscribe to Darwinist beliefs... If you truly believe in survival of the fittest, why do we have beneficiaries?

[Mr Merde]

... If you truly believe in survival of the fittest, why do we have beneficiaries?

How else are we expected to measure our own self worth?

[Murray]

Why should a bottom of the heap child abuser/rapist/murderer that has been released from jail get the same rights as their victim, or those in society who have had to pay for the misadventures. Same goes for people who have stayed on the benefit 'seeking' employment for the last X years.

Because if you didn't you wouldnt have a Labour Party!!!!! and you do need an opposition!!!

[alanzs]

Hmm but answer me this. Most here would subscribe to Darwinist beliefs... If you truly believe in survival of the fittest, why do we have beneficiaries?

Or seat belts, or helmets, or child-proof caps on medicines and toxic chemicals... Let the strong survive.

There is, albeit small, a school of thought that would like to make a correlation of the denigration of the gene pool to the introduction of child proof caps on medicines and toxic household products. In the old days, Stupid Curious Kid ingested the toxic chemicals/medicines and died, therefore not passing on their "flawed" genetic material to others. With these child protection devices, they don't stop their Stupid Curious genetic material from passing on to others. Hence, we have a whole population of Stupid Curious people, breeding ad infinitum.

Famous last words "Hey, watch this..."

Just a thought about Darwinism....

[Robert Taylor]

Don't compare the SNP to the BNP. Scotland wanting independence has fuck all to do with Polish immigrants.



The same bloke who said that children like me* should have been forced into adoption. If that's your idea of a practical social conscience then maybe you'll regard Enoch Powell as a liberal.

*those from single parent families.

Self made man? He went to one of the oldest and most egalitarian public schools in England before going to Oxford and then starting his business with his inheritance.

At no time should it be interpreted that one has to blanketly agree with everything that Enoch Powell said. That doesnt stop me having immense admiration for the man.
Adoption is a subject that I am painfully aware of, my Father was adopted and didnt even know he was until he was 21 years old! He only found out when he accepted his commission in the RAF. He never spoke of it but it was a scar that he carried for the remainder of his life. Despite that his adoptive parents gave him a very good start in life, as many adoptive parents do.
I am a National voter but at no time do I agree with all of their policies, especially the more liberal ones. Heck Ive even got respect for a couple of people in the outgoing Government, but Id never ever vote for them. My local MP is Harry Duynhoven, a charming guy to talk to but he knows only too well that hes not getting my vote. I just happen to agree with him on the need for compulsory motor vehicle insurance, for example.
As for Michael Heseltine, its no more his fault that he was born into relative prosperity than it is someone being born into poverty. I beg to differ that he started his business empire from a rather large bag of money. The fact is whatever he started with ( which I believe was relatively modest ) he made into a much larger bag of money. He did that and carried people along with him, I applaud him for that. As a Conservative MP he was very effective and was the driving force behind the regeneration of London Docklands and a few other projects in some more Northern English cities. Moreover, he had the courage of his convictions by resigning over a point of principle re the Westland affair. I think it is fair to say he was a good pin up model for the face of ''compassionate Conservatism'' I know in saying that there are a couple of very blinkered socialists on this site that have serious trouble believing such exists. I look at politicians in England such as Michael Heseltine and David Cameron and even ( horror of horrors! ) a couple of the Labour people there and think ''we could do with a few of those here''
That our electoral system allow such MPs as Sue Bradford is an embarrassment to our country. I much much preferred Max Bradford, he didnt pull any punches nor suffer fools.

[svr]

Hmm but answer me this. Most here would subscribe to Darwinist beliefs... If you truly believe in survival of the fittest, why do we have beneficiaries?

Because humans have evolved as social, moral animals.

[svr]

''compassionate Conservatism'' I know in saying that there are a couple of very blinkered socialists on this site that have serious trouble believing such exists

A little disturbing to read the antidemocratic sentiment, racism, and generally bigotted, elitist, divisive hatred that has surfaced through this thread.
Could someone please demonstrate how this is `compassionate' and not just `standard' Conservatism?

[davereid]

A little disturbing to read the antidemocratic sentiment, racism, and generally bigotted, elitist, divisive hatred that has surfaced through this thread.
Could someone please demonstrate how this is `compassionate' and not just `standard' Conservatism?

Democracy is merely mob rule... it only becomes of value when it has limits. IMHO those rules should prevent government using violence against non-violent people. Sadly, our current system gives the mob, the right to pillage as they see fit.

Racisim - bigotted, elitist, divisive hatred ? Not evidenced in the thread anymore than evidenced in the real world. ie if maori or any other self-identifed group constitute 6% of the population but 25% of benefits are paid to them, they can expect 25% of the bleating...

Compassionate ? Thats what you get when you get charity. When people give freely. Our current system is way-more than compassionate, under any government.

I haven't seen anyone on this thread suggest we should let people be left without support, or assistance.

All I have seen is the suggestion that we expect work for that support. I can't really define that as a bad thing, given that its how those who pay the benefits get their money.

[svr]

Racisim - bigotted, elitist, divisive hatred ? Not evidenced in the thread anymore than evidenced in the real world.

Exactly


ie if maori or any other self-identifed group constitute 6% of the population but 25% of benefits are paid to them, they can expect 25% of the bleating...

Show me a recently colonized indigeneous population that doesn't need help? Preventing the completion of Maori cultural extinction will cost a few Imperial dollars, and I for one am happy to contribute

Compassionate ? Thats what you get when you get charity. When people give freely. Our current system is way-more than compassionate, under any government.
Charity, along with pity, is what the rich give to the needy. Compassion is a little more humane

I haven't seen anyone on this thread suggest we should let people be left without support, or assistance.
No, just a few basic human rights such as democratic participation!

All I have seen is the suggestion that we expect work for that support. I can't really define that as a bad thing, given that its how those who pay the benefits get their money.

True - every able body should be engaged in reasonable work (or upskilling).