tis also bizarre that criticism of two political parties is taken as an argument to vote for some other one. People are bellends generally arent they?

You have a really good handle on what the majority of Liberal Democrat activists are about (not to be confused with what Clegg is about).

This left liberalism you describe seems to take us up to the New Liberalism of the 1890s.

Liberal Party and now Lib Dem activists have as their ideology ideas set out in this extremely influential publication from the ‘70s, The Theory and Practice of Community Politics, that can be found here in all its glorious golf-ball typography and lettraset – a period piece. http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/aldc/commpol.htm

I doubt Clegg has read it and probably hasn’t even heard of it (he is a fully paid up neo-liberal, the root of his ideas stemming from the period prior even to New Liberalism). But 80% of the Parliamentary Party and most of the Party’s councillors practice their community activity using this ideology.

It is worth opening – it is not, I stress, an election technique, it is a position that has evolved from Mill, Green, and Hobhouse/Hobson. I’d be really interested in views of it.

When there is no ideological debate, citizens actually get apathetic and hostile to politicians. Down with consensus!

I demand that you expound your theory of the internet via the conceptual framework of claim-internets. This esoteric refinement is essential for the logic of your broad-brush comment.

p.s. you are an idiot, ho ho ho, I’m much cleverer than you

etc etc ad nauseum

That typo has been the bloody bane of me this month. Honestly, every time i go to write “decent” I write “descent”, and vise versa!

But you should apply to the Grauniad for a sub editor role: you’ve clearly got sharper eyes than they do!!