I almost came close to pledging a Yes Vote the day you hurriedly passed me at my slave labour at Bermondsey Underground Station ( where I am confined to an unskilled job not because I am unskilled, but because of all the wrong reasons). Many misguided ordinary people including ethnic minority naturally assume the Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) and the Labour Party are pro-ordinary people and pro-fairness hence; the masses often get easily swayed by any cry for fairness by the Lib Dems or Labour.
I must confess that I was until the last minute slightly swayed by the Yes campaign’s argument for a fairer voting system which they claim is found in the AV system, but the cloud of sentiment cleared off my sight once I sat down to compel my mind to a proper dissection of the arguments of both sides. I was probably swayed by the Yes campaign's argument that the current First Pass the Post system encourages job for life for MPs, but on a clearer look,
I find no force in this argument. Although, I share the sentiment against your likes that are life MPs and the culture of hereditary MPs which your political party equally represent, I do not see any correlation between the current system and jobs-for-life-MPs.
The fact that some people must be MPs not because they are popular or competent or even appreciably intelligent (e.g. the Nadine Dorrises of Westminster), but simply because they are connected or anointed by the party leadership or need to be handpicked to creat some outlook of equality of opportunities is a very British undemocratic practice which cannot be remedied by AV. The only remedy lies in practicing democracy to the letter by way of allowing the members of the party and the masses to choose party candidates. Of course, you should know that due to our kind of parliamentary democracy and the role of our manipulative media that people are always going to vote for the party rather than the individuals. Hence, the reason why MPs like yourself and your boss Nick Clegg have jobs for life must be because favoured candidates are imposed rather than elected by member of the political parties.
It is therefore clear that your argument for Yes is as poor,unintelligent and ppintless as a typical Lib Dem's idea or policy( for example, Nick Clegg’s foolish idea and argument for paternity leave period to be extended to the level of maternity leave).
I must assure you that I was also attracted to the Yes vote because I wanted to vote against the band of nasty privileged one-eyed men in government, but at the last minute I decided against making the most hopeless and incompetent nepotism produced politicians in Britain (Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband) appear great by voting yes.
My general stand is simply that all the major parties are in it together when it comes to cheating or deceiving the people and as well as celebrating inequality . Nepotism and all the public service vices are found in all major political parties with none having the moral ground to accuse another of any unfairness.
I am not fooled to accept that any political party that practices nepotism and inequality can ever stand tall enough to preach fairness! In any case, there is no issue of fairness here. It is simply a case of choosing between commonsense and idiocy and I have rightly chosen commonsense!!
