A leader is elected by about 150 people out of 64 million?

Post Reply New Topic

How ironic that some people voted to leave because of supposedly EU not being democratic, only to get a PM who got selected by HALF her party. NOT members, just good jolly 150 MPs. Since her only rival turned out to be weak the UK got, beyond my memory, the worst result in democracy since Douglas-Home lasted a grand total of a year. At least her career should be wrecked soon, and if no GE is held at some point people could justifiably call her an unelected dictator.

Such governments exist all around the world, but now, thanks to Brexit, we all got a slice out of that pure unadulterated pie of ruthlessness. Now if she becomes Assad and suddenly wants more than bureaucratic power I hope millions won't be killed because of 150 barefaced anti-democrats.

??
Please explain

I don't get your 150,000 reference???

Edit. Parliment voted her IN.

me .. Easily confused about politics.

Ironic it may be. But that's how Parliamentary democracies and constitutional monarchies work.

The source of sovereignty in the United Kingdom is not, and never has been the people. It is the Queen in Parliament. The Prime Minister wields power not by virtue of an electoral mandate, but because she enjoys the confidence of the House of Commons.

Prime Ministers have always wielded enormous power--all of the Crown's prerogatives can be exercised by the Prime Minister. However, the Prime Minister is accountable to Parliament, and while the country can't vote against her until the next election, the backbenchers can vote against her tonight.

And it bears noting that there is one fundamental difference between the United Kingdom under May and Syria under Assad: The Rule of Law.

Gordon Brown wasn't elected either after Blair resigned, his leadership wasn't even contested by his party.

A point I made in a similar thread, and one which most adults while pissed off about it in the UK (Blairites included), we moved on.

I can't wait for all the parties to have leaders again and for the political turbulence to settle in the UK.

Justification lies not in history... so long as people defend this practice they can't also eat the cake and claim to support democracy... and what is the rule of law? Lack of civil war? May also wants to destroy human rights, which Assad actually put into physical practice... as such, if the unelected cabinet decides to set up, hypothetically, the Final Solution ('Go Home' vans could easily transform into eradication of 'swarms', which I'm sure was how Hitler viewed the Jews), will people still claim it's rule of law and that they're justified to be there just because some previous government's manifesto was voted in but a year later clearly moved the goalposts?

There was a coup in Turkey and even that government had more votes than the UK's could ever dream of... so, I assume, if people are oppressed it is useless to think that 199 voting for a PM is democracy, because they could revolt, especially when divided, like Turkish people are (and after Brexit everyone knows how divided the country ended up being, with hate crime increasing).