Leaderboard

markm: you're evidently worked up, and i appreciate your passion, though you do come across a little patronising here. I'm no fool, in fact i'm rather well read in politics and economics.   I don't believe single-party systems are inherently bad, nor do I believe universal voting rights in a capital-driven system to be necessarily good. The fact that a group of millionaires from the same university class were able to convince the UK to vote for them using huge amounts of money is proof enough for me that multi-party democracy isn't an automatic pass card to great freedoms and a wonderful society!   I also believe Marxist systems can work, and indeed are the only forward for a peaceful world. In China, the middle way is in effect. It is an interesting evolution of the dialectic in economic and social terms, and it's exciting to see things pan out. Their economy is certainly booming.   The idea that I'm giving up freedom and democracy by not handing political power over to a party I mistrust is absurd. I'm excercising the very right by not voting for them.   When they start talking about a roadmap for renationalising health, education, transport, gas, electricity, water, post, banking, and other essential services they may start to interest me. At the moment there are huge holes in their manifesto surrounding such vital issues. The so-called manifestos are wishy washy at best, simply empty sentences at their worst.   I agree with tight border control, but only because huge numbers of unskilled workers flowing over borders only serves to create an international underclass and helps no one but the ruling elite. A properly-run communist system not only solidifies national identity, it also ensures a consistant quality of life and removes the possibility of excessive profit, exploitation, nepotism and greed. We've yet to see one so far in the world, but we will eventually, and like to see it in the UK. I don't think UKIP share this belief, thus I wont vote for them.   So yes, I could be classed as an extremist too, but I believe a preoccupation with equality, co-operation and eliminating corruption to be a good extreme, quite the opposite to your fear mongering.   Now I do love political debate, but this really has gone a bit far don't you think, for a Tarantino thread?     Anyway, take the last word my good man, and I'll leave you with this wonderful piece of Wiki in glorious Comic Sans:   Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies[1][2]) is an observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990[2] that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3] In other words, Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.

Really beautiful, thanks for sharing.