Starmer: I will abolish House of Lords

While I agree with your conclusion about the make up of the (to be rebranded) HoL, Zany, maybe less so your path to get there.

You do get lazy narcissistic greedy power crazy politicians - I think Johnson and Patel would fall into that category - I don’t think that’s true of the vast majority. Most go into the role with the right intentions wanting to make the world a better place. The media and particular internet driven incessant abuse is making the job almost impossible. While we may disagree passionately with the views of Truss and Kwarteng and Braverman and Sunak and Sunak and Starmer and Corbyn and Abbott, I think they are all decent people believing their ideas are the right ones for the country.

We should all be concerned that people like Dehenna Davison, Chloe Smith, William Wragg are all walking away thinking it’s not worth the hassle. Look at the abuse the Finnish PM got for trying to be normal outside of work. Don’t know the answer but at least let’s recognise we are the problem.

In my view, our society doesn't have the chops for this kind of discernment any more. Decades of smiley, degenerate TV has blunted our social senses and our worst psychopaths grin at us daily and outline their parasitic world view in our living rooms. Additionally, a lot of this filtering cannot be done just on election day. The fact that you can't readily tell the difference between a psychopath and an altruist is the whole point of psychopathy. If the filtering is not done on election day, when is it done? Perhaps it is performed through a social fabric that makes it difficult for psychopaths etc to get on. Codes of honour, non optional social standards and a disdain for corruption, betrayal and cowardice. This type of society, in my view, is a necessary pre-requisite for a functioning democracy. We used to have this, which imo is a large part of the reason we were successful.



I find your rhetoric here interesting. As long as you are targeting one group, you are IMHO missing the real problem. The problem is not that we have billionaires or they are not taxed enough, the real problem is that many of these billionaires have done little but play a patronage game we set up. The system has been stitched up (with our collusion) to pre-exclude any kind of merit that would be useful to us. Rather than select for real courage, honesty and integrity, we have set up a system of patronage, buzz wording and falseness that selects for all the wrong qualities for leadership and all but excludes the correct ones. So when it comes to polling day, we get to select between two entirely compromised, limp candidates with low personal qualities, who have likely spent their entire life doing little but exactly what they are told (advised) to do. This is what I mean when i say that our ruling class comes from an environment which is the opposite of one that selects for merit. There is some limited 'merit' in saying the 'correct' things until you end up king, but it is not a merit that is useful to anyone else but yourself.



This can't work in the current environment. It would likely just be hijacked by people inventing their own dimensions of merit and insisting they also be represented.
Could it be that one key to a working society is intolerance?

This poster would have been around the time of when what would become Lloyd George's land reform proposals began to be discussed by the public. These were eventually quashed by the HOL.

The people depicted are probably not non binary people fighting for their pronouns, but rather people who said some genuine issues based in reality.

Back then the HoL was full of Tories. Full of people who had inherited their place as Peers and provided a major backing for the Conservative party and their ilk. It should have been abolished back then, but since then, thanks to New Labour the title of Peer of is now for life and is not transferable to members of the family. Those hereditary Peers that still exist will be the end of the line for their family.
The idea that the present HoL can be improved upon is open for discussion which includes the possibility of it being abolished and replaced with something better.