On Feb 3, 2010, at 4:36 PM, James Heartfield wrote:
> There is nothing uniquely American about the right basing itself on
> over-represented small town and rural areas, as a counter-balance to
> the more social-democratic cities. It is the norm in Britain (where
> geographical constituencies are drawn to give rural voters extra
> weight) whose Tory party is largely elected by the suburban and
> rural parts of the country. It is true, I believe, also of most of
> Europe, and even Japan.
Does Britain have anything like our Senate, where a handful of thinly populated conservative states can block legislation? (Does the House of Lords even have any legislative function?) I thought that a common complaint against your parliamentary system was that it's something of an elective dictatorship where the party in power can do pretty much whatever it wants as long as it has a decent majority. The Chancellor can dictate fiscal policy. Our fiscal policy is an indescribable mess.
> Left wingers' fear and contempt for suburbanites, for the white
> working classes, the chavs, 'mouth-breathers', is a refrain that is
> sadly not that original. And - lo and behold! - radical ideas are
> not that popular. Could there be a connection?
No.