World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Maybe I’m missing something. In fact I’m sure I am as I don’t follow UK politics closely at all. Mostly what I know is from scrolling past headlines like this one.
Confusing thing #1: My understanding is the Conservative (Tory?) party is struggling so the PM called for a “snap” election.
If you’re not doing great, wouldn’t it make more sense to try and weather the storm and work to make things sunnier before the next election rather than call for an election amidst the storm?
Confusing thing #2: If you are in said storm and now looking down the barrel of an election, wouldn’t that be the opposite of the time you would want to announce your unpopular policy ideas?
This really sounds like someone who is trying to get fired instead of quit.
So what am I missing?
You’re missing that they are just incompetent and awful at politics
But haven’t they been in power for like 10 years or something?
That may be more of a condemnation of their opposition than of them…
It partly is but also that they’ve just ran out of “talent”. Anyone who was any good was there at the start and they’ve just not been able to replace them.
More like actively removed them for yes men at the last election because the competent ones opposed brexit. The current administration is more a populist brexit party than a traditions Conservative platform.
Angry boomers will love it, also the masculinists who think boys are too weak these days.
It feels to me like the Tories (and their wealthy mates) have now got to the point where they don’t feel they can rinse the taxpayer for much more without everyone seeing them for the craven vampires they are, so they’re happily stepping back for one or two terms.
In that time Labour will struggle like fuck to get the country back to where it was 14 years ago when the Tories walked back into Number 10, the papers will blame Labour for everything being shit, and the door will be open for the Tories to come back in and carry on the pillaging with coffers that are worth the effort.
The latest possible date the election could have been is January 2025, but that was practically very unlikely as i) there is an extremely sharp generational divide in voting intentions (far sharper than in most Western democracies) and January would have meant the Tories having to get their elderly core voters to the polls in the middle of winter, and ii) a January vote would have meant a campaign running over Christmas, and everyone would have punished Sunak for that. The widespread expectation was for an autumn election.
It's unclear why Sunak jumped earlier but likely a combination of various factors:
them being worried the economy will not get better by the autumn (so avoids going to the polls after a summer of bad economic news);
going early means their main opponents on the right (Reform) don't have time to get their act together and select candidates in all seats (which they would have done by the autumn);
their flagship immigration policy is controversial and expensive, yet likely to have an underwhelming impact on illegal immigration levels, and they'll look like complete idiots for centring an autumn election on a 'stop the boats' slogan if there's another summer of small boat arrivals in the meantime; and
Sunak personally is fed up - he's very much a political child of the far-right (an avowed Brexiter long before Boris Johnson or Liz Truss converted to the cause) yet the far-right of the Tory Party don't see him as one of their own and have been constant thorns in his side throughout his leadership - he may just want out at this stage.
I was curious about the whole "calling elections" thing so I looked it up.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/calling-general-election
They have to call an election within five years of the last one, but the choice of when is up to the prime minister. Seems calling it early gets him and his party a bit of a bump.
Confusing thing #1 was actually a smart move.
Reform party, who has been a bunch of useful idiots and have been diluting the Tory vote significantly have not got enough members in place to stand in every location as this will be their first general election and they are a new party.
The SNP has only just picked a new leader after the previous one stepped down and they have fallen out of favour in recent times.
Labour (main competition) was not expecting anything until November time as the running theory is that the Tories would wait for a bit to see if something would "come up" and rescue their awful polling (as per your suggestion). So even they were caught off guard and now have to scramble to organise everything. This shit isn't easy, even for established parties.
Hell, even the Tories were caught off guard by their leader doing this.
Sunak has played an interesting card here. I doubt it will make any difference but at least he is being somewhat clever with the surprise timing of this.
My guess on #2 is Europe is increasing posturing against Russia as they continue to escalate the situation in Ukraine, so this accomplishes:
For what it's worth, I actually think forced conscription (with alternatives) is actually an idea that can work well and help build a better more cohesive society where all people despite their differences participate in their "citizenly duties", but it has to be done right: military service can be an option, as well as community service in things like fire departments, Emergency medical services, even working in government services like the NHS or community centers that have options for mentor programs, etc. Basically anything that teaches young adults to give back to their community which can hopefully turn into a lifelong habit. But you can't start the policy as some bullshit military posturing. It has to come from a place of "we're doing this to make our community better". Also, you can't make day 1 implementation only start with the current young adult generation and have everyone older than them grandfathered out. EVERYONE shoulders this. Anyone voting for it needs to know they're all going to be participating in this (pro-rated based on age up to 65 or 70, but still those above should be encouraged to participate despite no obligation). But that probably sounds like communism or something.
This sort of thing seems like exactly the sort of thing that would spur that demographic to come out and vote. Self-interest is a powerful thing.
Yeah, it does, and yet hardly any young voters showed up to the polls when the torries wanted to flush the kids futures down the toilet with the Brexit vote. So they've got lots of historical data to suggest young voters don't matter.
#1. It’s not really a ‘snap’ election, it’s been called within the normal window of calling an election. While things could have got better if he’d held on they could have also got worse. With inflation down to more normal rates it looks like he thought ‘this is as good as it’ll get’
#2. Dunno.
For 2, I reckon they're really really pushing for the old white racist man votes. I think it's damage control to hold on to some seats. They think that's the best they're going to get.
That or they plan to win over those votes now, then change their tune closer to the election to win more moderate votes too, thinking that the right wing voters are stubborn and will therefore stick with them having made up their minds already.
It's a standard tactic in parliament style politics. He won't win if he waits till end of term for an election, but might eke out a victory now, and then had four or five years to go
The choice of policy ideas is weird but the strategy of snap elections can reinforce the party's power until the next election if it goes well. It's like squeezing your electorate for more power until the balance shifts in the other direction