How do Catholics vote outside the US? Especially in the UK

[EmilyAlexandra]

First what it’s worth most Catholics will vote like pretty much everyone else in the UK, geographically.

Yes, but that’s surely only because (and where) geography and class overlay eachother.

Whether we call it class or geography or a combination of the two, the picture that emerges is one in which Catholic voters in the UK (and seemingly Canada and Australia) are not generally voting based on their religious convictions, except that a few people mention favouring an individual candidate locally who is known to have pro-life views.

Yes, I have tried to explain to my friend that by 1956 the USSR had the capacity to destroy western Europe and by 1957 it possessed nuclear weapons capable of reaching targets in north America. An interesting question is whether the Warsaw Pact and, indeed, the Soviet Union itself would have survived a Third World War with nuclear weapons. My guess is that Poland, for example, as in the First World War, would have seized the opportunity to fight for its own freedom, thereby intensifying the hypothetical war in central Europe. Nonetheless, my friend remains convinced that a global nuclear conflict in the 1950s would have been a desirable enterprise. I believe her rationale is that it would have been nobler to bring humankind to the brink of destruction fighting communism than to appease it. I should not be surprised, as she has often inveighed against the Western Allies for fighting the Nazis rather than joining them in the struggle against communism.

How can Brits vote for such a buffon?

Many people find him likeable. I am a member of the Labour Party, but used to find Boris quite amusing. Indeed, he is one of two British politicians I can think of who is generally referred to by his first name. The other is his predecessor as mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. As for how he managed to win the election, two things: Brexit and Jeremy Corbyn. Needless to say, I found Boris Johnson considerably less amusing when he told the Foreign Affairs Committee that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was in Iran “simply teaching people journalism”, which was exactly what the Iranian regime claimed she was doing. When a British citizen is imprisoned in Iran accused of teaching people journalism, it is not helpful for the British foreign secretary to say that she was teaching people journalism.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

As a Labour Party member, I cannot describe how angry it still makes me thinking about the thousands of people at Glastonbury chanting, “Oh, Jeremy Corbyn”. Evidently Corbyn was some kind of a hero to them, because he seemingly shared their naive far-left ideology. These people would not chant, “Oh, Tony Blair”, but the fact is that Blair is the only leader of the Labour Party to win a general election (three of them, in fact) since Harold Wilson in 1974. Given that the next general election is not scheduled until 2024, Blair will become the only leader of the Labour Party to win a general election in half a century. Corbyn’s supporters are the kind of smug, self-satisfied people who live in an echo chamber and hence do not understand that the goal of politics is to win power and that power is won by being realistic.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

Do people perceive it as fair?

Yes, I think the judiciary are generally perceived as fair in Britain. The exceptions are basically those already set out: Brexit and unduly lenient sentencing, especially for sex offenders, where the public would (understandably) welcome harsher sentencing.

With regard to the infamous ‘Enemies of the People’ headline, it is worth saying that the criticism of the judiciary in the right-wing tabloid press was met with widespread disapproval. One of the reasons why it was shocking to see the judiciary vilified in the media was because it is simply not something that happens under normal circumstances.

Following the case known as R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland, which found that the prime minister had unlawfully advised the Queen to prorogue Parliament, people began including the emoji in their social media profiles to express support for the president of the Supreme Court, Brenda Hale. Lady Hale invariably wears a brooch in court, usually portraying an animal, and on the occasion of giving the judgement in Miller/Cherry she wore a spider brooch. Personally, I think she has better brooches, including a centipede and a fox.

I think it’s a better system, too. I just can’t imagine how it’d work in the US with our two party system and always at each other’s throats.

I guess the only way for it to work would be to amend the Constitution so that federal judges are appointed by non-political process. In theory, the US system is a good one, because it is democratically accountable and balances the power of the executive and the legislature. In Britain, as we do not have a written constitution, and because we are a very old country, we tend to try out different things and see what works.

the UK judiciary is generally subordinate to Parliament

Exactly. Parliament can make or unmake any law and enjoys supremacy over both the government and the courts. Generally speaking, Parliament changes laws that need changing; it doesn’t really change laws because it doesn’t like how a court has interpreted them. Rarely, a court can make a declaration of incompatibility, which states that a law is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, and Parliament has invariably implemented the court’s recommendations.

And I believe the UK Supreme Court is a relatively new institution.

It is, but the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords, which it replaced, was really a supreme court in all but name. The Labour government felt that it was an anomaly that our final court of appeal was technically a committee of the upper house of legislature, an arrangement that had evolved over hundreds of years from the medieval custom of appeals being heard by Parliament. The government was also concerned that the Lord Chancellor was in the peculiar situation of being a member of the Cabinet, the speaker of the upper house of legislature, and the head of the judiciary.

 

[Inquisitor85]

These people would not chant, “Oh, Tony Blair”,

I mean taking the UK into an American war for corporate profit, and then lying to both the public and The House about the reasons for said war, is generally frowned upon. I mean he did win three elections, but him and his brand are now so toxic that its impossible for Labour to refuse.

 

[Kaninchen]

I mean taking the UK into an American war for corporate profit, and then lying to both the public and The House about the reasons for said war, is generally frowned upon.

In the general population (rather than just the Labour left), how many people really care about this, do you think?

 

[Montrose]

In the general population (rather than just the Labour left), how many people really care about this, do you think?

Not very many I would think.

 

[PickyPicky]

In the general population (rather than just the Labour left), how many people really care about this, do you think?

Almost none now, political memories being often short, but a fair number cared at the time. And as a member of the Liberal Democrats I am nicely placed to say it was not only the Labour Left who opposed the war.

 

[Kaninchen]

Not very many I would think.

Yet following arguments within the Labour Party during the era of the rise and fall of Corbyn, it often appeared that, from one side, the burning issues confronting the British electorate were the Iraq War and the condition of the Palestinian people - to be against Corbyn was to be a neoliberal Zionist-bought supporter of the most evil politician in the history of the UK (Blair).

Almost none now, political memories being often short, but a fair number cared at the time. And as a member of the Liberal Democrats I am nicely placed to say it was not only the Labour Left who opposed the war.

Of course not, some of us (then) Tories weren’t exactly enthusiastic - my comment was really about an aspect of Labour politics (one of a series in the Corbyn-era) that led to a focus that was irrelevant to the rapidly changing world we live in.

As to the entirely nonsensical devotion to the historically irrelevant that the Tory Party has foisted on the UK . . . well, let’s say that the Labour Party’s nonsense played a rôle in enabling it.

 

[Inquisitor85]

That’s hard for me to judge, I live in a Labour stronghold, my social circle is predominantly Labour supporters, I work for a unionised automaker and Conservative supporting working class media (namely The S*n) has been under a successful consumer boycott for over 30 years. What I can tell you is that if Blair is brought up in conversation someone will call him a war criminal, and from a perusal of the Daily Fail comments section (a notably right wing paper), it seems that is pretty evenly split left/right.

 

[Kaninchen]

I live in a Labour stronghold

We live in ‘Midsomer’ (London refugee).

(namely The S*n)

Hillsborough?

 

[Inquisitor85]

We live in ‘Midsomer’ (London refugee).

Blimey, the middle class murder capital of the world if you believe ITV.

Hillsborough?

Yup, that’ll be the one. Although judging from some of the more… Republican, shall we say, posters on here I’m sure that’s an example of “SJW Marxist Cancel Culture”.

 

[Kaninchen]

Blimey, the middle class murder capital of the world if you believe ITV.

And when you consider the fact that Oxford borders on it - all those Morse, Lewis and Endeavour murders on top of that. In reality, “Dog loose on Common,” would make the headline in the local press.

Republican, shall we say, posters on here I’m sure that’s an example of “SJW Marxist Cancel Culture”.

I wouldn’t know, for several years here, I’ve had most American Conservatives on ‘Ignore’.

 

[Inquisitor85]

And when you consider the fact that Oxford borders on it - all those Morse, Lewis and Endeavour murders on top of that.

You are lucky to be alive! Well Done!!!

I wouldn’t know, for several years here, I’ve had most American Conservatives on ‘Ignore’.

I would do that, but I remember 2016. Part of the reason I’ve stayed around here is to try to get some perspective from the other side.

 

[PickyPicky]

As to the entirely nonsensical devotion to the historically irrelevant that the Tory Party has foisted on the UK . . . well, let’s say that the Labour Party’s nonsense played a rôle in enabling it.

True.

The S*n) has been under a successful consumer boycott for over 30 years

I’m a former Times reader and I have boycotted it, and all the rest of the Murdoch products, ever since Harold Evans was manoeuvred out. And that’s a serious boycott, because it has meant not seeing televised international cricket for decades! What a blessing that Sky has now slipped from his clutches.

We live in ‘Midsomer’ (London refugee).

Us too.

“Dog loose on Common,” would make the headline in the local press

Goats with us.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

Since we are in this place, it may be of interest to know that bishops of the Church of England are also chosen by commission.

Yes, the appointments process is somewhat similar, but I am not convinced that the two processes yield quite the same results. In the case of judges, virtually the only criterion is that the person appointed should have the necessary skills to be good at the job (there are rare exceptions, e.g. that Supreme Court justices must collectively possess expertise in the three UK legal systems). There is also a fairly standard career path for judges, meaning that the pool of candidates at each stage is limited. In the case of the most recent appointment to the Supreme Court, the likely pool of candidates was presumably limited to the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland and the three Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland. There is scope for unusual appointments, e.g. Jonathan Sumption, appointed directly from the bar, and Andrew Burrows, appointed from an academic post.

I think in the case of Church of England bishops there is more of a tendency to make somewhat bland or predictable appointments. I think this is because bishops would tend to have more strongly held personal opinions, which will be well known within the Church. The Church of England has to embrace a diverse membership, including traditional Catholics, liberal, modern, or affirming Catholics, conservative evangelicals, open evangelicals, and those of no particular churchmanship or school of theology. The Church of England is bitterly divided over issues concerning homosexuality and still, to some extent, the ordination of women, and these divisions are seemingly only becoming deeper. I think this leads to a situation in which a bishop is often merely a safe pair of hands. It seems unlikely that bishops such as David Jenkins, Richard Harries, or Roy Williamson would progress far in today’s Church of England. There is also no established career path for bishops. Many have been archdeacons or theological college principals, but many are also cathedral deans or canons, academics, or appointed directly from parish ministry. It seems that recently there has been a rush to appoint as many women as possible, and I think the Church is also trying to appoint more BAME bishops.

 

[PickyPicky]

I think in the case of Church of England bishops there is more of a tendency to make somewhat bland or predictable appointments

There is that danger, although the appointment of the current Archbishop of Canterbury was hardly predictable, given that he’d only been a bishop for five minutes. But he’s an Open Evangelical, of course, and it was “the Evangelicals’ turn”.

And I don’t think either Rowan Williams or Richard Chartres were exactly bland. Or Sarah Mullally, come to that. But you are broadly right. Via Media produces Via Media bishops.

The favourite bishop of my youth was David Sheppard, (Liverpool), former England cricket captain.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

Sorry, I meant “Catholic” in the Anglican sense. Anglicans often call themselves “traditional Catholic”, meaning theologically conservative, often conservative on moral issues, opposing ordination of women, and using essentially Roman Catholic liturgy, or liberal/modern/affirming Catholic, meaning theologically more progressive, supporting ordination of women and LGBT Anglicans, and using the approved Anglican liturgies.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I think it’s fair to say that American politics is generally speaking more ideological than politics in many other countries, especially within the English-speaking world.

No kidding!

Just for fun about 10+ years ago I copied a summary of the various party positions on important issues in the Canadian federal election and took them into work (in the US). My experiment was very simple: could Americans match the position of a certain party on a given issue to that party (Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Green, PQ, etc.).

And the answer is that they could not. Not even close, although with a couple issues (Afghanistan) it was clearer who was left and who was right. But otherwise, it was almost impossible for a foreigner (any foreigner!) to tell.

One issue I remember was pre-school child care. The question WASN’T whether it should exist or not. The party differences were all about technical issues: how much (ages of children, how many hours a day) should there be and how it would be paid for. Most issues were like this–general agreement on the issue with the disagreement being over “how much” and “who pays, and how.” It’s a totally different world!

 

[Erikaspirit16]

We live in ‘Midsomer’

Take me with you! We’ve been watching 1-2 episodes a day during Covid, starting at the beginning. We’re now beginning season 13. It’s like every British actor/actress has a clause in their union contract: “You must appear in at least one episode of Midsomer Murders.” The killer hiding in the bushes, the mysterious gloved (always black) hand, the village secrets, the entire village constantly at each other’s throats, Jones going after every pretty girl in sight, Joyce having an insight that solves the case–they write themselves. And the houses! Count me in, I want to live in Midsomer.

 

[Kaninchen]

Count me in, I want to live in Midsomer.

Well, Midsomer is just Bucks, Berks and South Oxon, our bit’s good for trees, squirrel street gangs - and trips to Oxford.

Many of the actors did time in Morse/Lewis/Endeavour as well - the lucky ones even manage to get holidays in Guadeloupe (Death in Paradise).